tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post567472460133632570..comments2024-03-29T12:59:00.612+05:30Comments on Jabberwock: Some links (and scattered thoughts on the darker side of sexuality)Jabberwockhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-16793253671177045862013-01-01T16:04:44.735+05:302013-01-01T16:04:44.735+05:30I'm not sure how the angle between the science...I'm not sure how the angle between the sciences and the humanities emerged here, or is even germane to the discussion. I think the argument for 'obtaining sexual gratification through violence' works in general. It is especially pertinent when you consider the fact that a large number of Indian males do not even understand what rape might be, conceptually. ( I'll direct you towards a large number of threads on desi forums, should you feel so inclined ). I do not believe we can give it short shrift in our context. Trying to get our men to understand gender ( power ) dynamics vis-a-vis sexual etiquette, I'd say the latter is more target-able. The idea being that situating this problem as 'either-or' seems like a false dilemma.WillOTheWisphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17519824840694799244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-10611518766504441332013-01-01T09:22:58.841+05:302013-01-01T09:22:58.841+05:30A very revealing link
Rape rates per 100K populat...A very revealing <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#UN_Rape_Statistics" rel="nofollow">link</a><br /><br />Rape rates per 100K population :<br />US - 27.3<br />UK - 28.8<br />South Africa - 120.0<br />Kenya - 2.1<br />India - 1.8<br />Aus - 91.9<br /><br />There is the issue of undeer-reporting in countries like India. But I don't think the under-reporting can be massive enough to directionally change all these numbers.<br /><br />I just don't see any factor that explains rape rates across countries.<br /><br />One tentative explanation could be that heterogenous, urban countries have higher rates than countries that are predominantly rural.shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-70846133475526591772012-12-30T23:27:46.267+05:302012-12-30T23:27:46.267+05:30Sapera: points taken, thanks. Though just to clari...Sapera: points taken, thanks. Though just to clarify again (in case it needs clarifying): nowhere am I saying that the patriarchy isn't a huge factor in all this. And I would hope there can be a middle ground between unnecessarily salacious, inelegant discourse and the delusion that rape has nothing to do with sex. (Can't count how many times I've read this in online discussions - just a few minutes ago, there was this reasonably intelligent person on my FB feed sending a discussion thread awry by proclaiming, in all-caps, "ALL OF YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT RAPE HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LIBIDO.")Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-26031323189494717432012-12-30T14:08:23.850+05:302012-12-30T14:08:23.850+05:30It would also be amazing to understand how much is...<i> It would also be amazing to understand how much is sexual repression linked to rape. But separating out that cause would be difficult though.</i><br /><br />My concern is that we invariably overanalyze the causes of deviant sexual behavior.<br /><br />No matter how liberal you are as a society, you will always have perverts in profusion, as evidenced by all the cases of sexual violence that come to light even in the most civilized parts of our world (like Northern Europe).<br /><br />There can be no civilization without "taboos" of any kind. You may stretch boundaries yes. But the perverts amongst us will always try to go past those boundaries no matter how far you stretch them.<br /><br />Ofcourse things are even more complicated in heterogenous societies like India where there are serious cultural conflicts in the cities that aggravate the inherent deviant tendencies in many males.<br /><br />Regarding your comment on "repression" in engg colleges :<br /><br />Having studied in an engineering college, the so-called "repressed" kids you talk about are generally too shy to even talk to girls. Not even in my wildest dreams can I imagine any of them engaging in violence!<br />shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-47784716699278794072012-12-30T12:22:39.218+05:302012-12-30T12:22:39.218+05:30From the same "Engineering college Anon"...From the same "Engineering college Anon" above<br />@Shrikanth: That is very interesting actually. I would be very curious to know case studies of countries/places with very low rape/molestation levels (unfortunately we need to work with what is declared officially - But guess that in developed countries one can reasonably assume that a high ratio of cases would get filed) or countries which were able to bring it down well over a period of time. It would also be amazing to understand how much is sexual repression linked to rape. But separating out that cause would be difficult though. Saudi Arabia might be a good case study had the law enforcement been poor. But they almost kill the rapists that even if they are sexually repressed, they don't think of acting on it. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-54613224857945413812012-12-30T05:24:18.898+05:302012-12-30T05:24:18.898+05:30Thanks for the links Jai. I read them pretty caref...Thanks for the links Jai. I read them pretty carefully, and I do believe the terrain of rape being discussed pertains mostly to the collegiate variety. A middle class, white girl problem as Camille Paglia so memorably put it (she said many, many problematic things but this isn't the time or the place). <br /><br />Of course rape isn't monolithic. It seems amazing that it needs pointing out, but I guess it does, eh? <br /><br />But for the overwhelmingly non-date rape scenarios, the arguments made in these articles don't really work. <br /><br />I've been thinking pretty hard about all this, but the sexual urge argument seems more and more specious. <br /><br />For simplicity, I will speak here only about the statistically most dominant occurence of heterosexual rape committed by males. <br /><br />For the heterosexual cis-male, like most of humanity, there will always be a sexual urge. There will always be girls for said cis-males to lust after, enough to trigger their "rape impulse" (ugh!), let's say. I guess that can't be stopped. But I suppose a culture of patriarchy coupled with weak administration that makes female bodies available to the nearest pair of grabbing hands can be changed, however slowly. This is clearly an issue of shifting state power in favor of those who have little of it. <br /><br />This is why academics/policy makers don't talk about sexual urge as a variable when they talk about rape. Human sexuality, morality, libidinal economies and such that contribute to patriarchy and rape culture (among other political variables more easily quantified) are fundamentally unknowable by their nature. <br /><br />Since most people get their information from a lethal combination of hearsay, innuendo and gossip, focusing on sexual urge mostly leads to a public discourse that is inelegant, salacious, bigoted and muddled. <br /><br />Case in point is the guy who posted above you saying Indian engineering colleges are filled with sexually deprived men who it is implied will given a chance, rape the nearest available woman. Of all the ways we talk about rape, this is probably the most common in India, where the sexual urge is already regarded as a pathology. Do we really need more of this for young Indian men and women painfully working out their sexualities? <br /><br />saperahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16553004590976656655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-86136755323972882392012-12-29T23:29:49.017+05:302012-12-29T23:29:49.017+05:30I wondered why is it that suppressed sexual urge i...<i> I wondered why is it that suppressed sexual urge is not considered as a good enough reason for rape in general discussions</i><br /><br />I am not sure if there are studies out there that support the idea that the more liberal a society's attitudes towards sex, the more responsible the behavior of its youngsters.<br /><br />The US for instance has much higher rates of unmarried teenage pregnancies than a lot of supposedly hidebound and conservative Asian countries. A lot of these teenagers end up on welfare - not an ideal situation for anybody. So it is fair to infer that most of these pregnancies are unplanned - a result of instinctive, irresponsible behavior.<br /><br />Also, the number of cases of gender assaults in US on an annual basis is by no means insignificant.<br /><br />So the idea that we have these horrific incidents in India because we as a nation are "repressed" is highly debatable to say the least.<br /><br /><br /><br />shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-3417316283857572592012-12-29T22:23:06.120+05:302012-12-29T22:23:06.120+05:30Anon: nothing wrong at all with speculating on mot...Anon: nothing wrong at all with speculating on motives - however discomfiting it might be - if it's done intelligently and in good faith. Do see the link I provided in my previous comment - the "Rapists Explain Themselves" one. Much of it makes immediate nonsense of the idea that "rape is never about sex".Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-2317503111220920752012-12-29T20:23:59.304+05:302012-12-29T20:23:59.304+05:30Hi,
This is a very interesting post. I wondered ...Hi, <br /><br />This is a very interesting post. I wondered why is it that suppressed sexual urge is not considered as a good enough reason for rape in general discussions. I have studied in a stereotypical good engineering college which had 90% males and 10% females. Most guys were sexually frustrated since most were virgins and porn was a very common pastime. It kind of released the sexual energies. These were some of the best intellectual brains and had good education. However, The sexual repression never manifested into rape - Maybe because the same folks were tuned to behave legally and in a way society looks favorably at them. I just wonder how the same guys would have behaved if they did not have the pressure of 'conforming to societal pressures'. Or how would folks who did not have the same 'societal pressure' behave. I hence totally do not agree to the 'power or domination of men' being 100% of the reason why rapes occur. I would be curious to know the extent to which is rape is committed by those who have access to easy pornography vs. those who don't (like probably the bus drivers). This led me to a line of thinking that having prostitution legalized in India would reduce rapes since there would be a way of releasing the pent up sexual energy legally. Maybe the thoughts I have expressed have no place in a decent society, but hey, our society is not decent anyway. It is better to find the real reasons rather than speculating on imaginary ones.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-25897207932015023562012-12-29T00:59:20.648+05:302012-12-29T00:59:20.648+05:30I had been having the same discomfort with all int...I had been having the same discomfort with all intelligentsia branding Rape as problem rooted in patriarchy. Although there is no denying that patriarchy seeks to control and dominate its women in various ways including rape, the issue of sexual repression seemed to have been brushed aside. It led me to write something http://www.thecasualchronicle.com/2012/12/rape-and-sexual-repression-in-india.html<br /><br />Thanks again for all the links, I loved the post by Maggie mcneil. Although I do see where Nilanjana and Sapera are coming from. Vindowshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05686630165159876047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-78130854462785640002012-12-28T21:52:23.832+05:302012-12-28T21:52:23.832+05:30As an aside, here's a chilling link -
http://...As an aside, here's a chilling link -<br /><br />http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500690_162-5590118.html<br /><br />90,000 reported rapes per year in United States. Arrest rate of around 25%!<br /><br />sapera : Needless to say 99% of these rapes involve male offenders.<br /><br />Just goes to show this malaise is a universal phenomenon. I was under the mistaken impression that rape rates would be very low in Scandinavia. But I just discovered that rape rates in Sweden are <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19592372" rel="nofollow">30 times higher</a> than the rates in India (ofcourse this may be exaggerated because a lot of rapes don't get reported in India, but still)<br /><br />I am not sure if these numbers (per-capita) have worsened or improved over the past 60-70 years. Wouldn't be surprised at all if they've worsened.<br /><br />Key lessons for me<br /><br />- The Human condition is fundamentally tragic and deeply flawed.<br /><br />- There doesn't seem to be much of a correlation between the wealth of a given society and its levels of sex crime.<br /><br />- The Sexual Revolution of the 60s/70s in Europe/US does not appear to have reduced the levels of crimes against women too significantly. Though I need more historical data to comment on whether it had any impact at all in either direction.shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-24401212690083190772012-12-28T16:34:13.963+05:302012-12-28T16:34:13.963+05:30Sapera: not sure if you're still reading this,...Sapera: not sure if you're still reading this, but just thought I'd share these two links: <a href="http://jezebel.com/5929544/rapists-explain-themselves-on-reddit-and-we-should-listen" rel="nofollow">Rapists Explain Themselves</a> and <a href="http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/live-through-this/" rel="nofollow">Live Through This</a> - the latter mentions some of Wendy McElroy's and Paglia's thoughts too.Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-54950256221401252712012-12-27T12:26:09.253+05:302012-12-27T12:26:09.253+05:30One final clarification on sapera's point :
....One final clarification on sapera's point :<br /><br /><i>.believing that we do what we do because BIOLOGY! Classic positivist dickbag, in other words who cherry picks evidence to prove that innate gendered behavior is an incontrovertible FACTUAL thing</i><br /><br />Firstly not even the most conservative of intellectuals believe that gender differences and gender roles are purely driven by biology!<br /><br />Biology plays a small role, but so does history! 10,000 years of human civilization to be precise.<br />So much historical baggage cannot simply be wished away or dismissed just like that, purely because the late 20th/early 21st century mind has some issues with the way that history has panned out.<br /><br />So when we comment on the behavior of men and women, you cannot simply rely on what science says. <br /><br />Science has nothing to say when it comes to comparing the behavior of Indian men and Norwegian men. But simple observation would tell you they do behave differently!<br /><br />Ofcourse there is no attempt here to rationalize or even empathise with criminal behavior! All I'm saying is that "All men are NOT created equal". When you are born you inherit the history of the culture into which you're born. And this baggage makes a huge difference to the way you behave.<br /><br />Things will change but it will take several centuries. And even that much desired "change" may be for better or worse.shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-43804859889323052642012-12-27T11:41:27.057+05:302012-12-27T11:41:27.057+05:30Good science is all about being open-minded to the...<i>Good science is all about being open-minded to the idea that all the assumptions you have worked with your entire career might be overturned by new discoveries</i><br /><br />Agree.<br />I was defining "open-minded" differently.<br /><br />One mustn't be "open-minded" to the extent that your brains fall out in the process!!<br /><br />At the end of the day, science is also a religion in the sense that its practitioners should have a strong belief in the "Scientific method" and "First principles".<br /><br />Once you lose that belief and start listening to every fad that goes around (most of which are politically motivated), you cease to be a scientist.shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-27980577521813692342012-12-27T11:15:37.735+05:302012-12-27T11:15:37.735+05:30Agree with this - Scientists don't need to be ...Agree with this - <i>Scientists don't need to be compassionate</i>, but disagree with this - <i>Scientists don't need to be "open-minded"</i>. (Good science is all about being open-minded to the idea that all the assumptions you have worked with your entire career might be overturned by new discoveries.) But it depends on how exactly you're defining those two words. (While "compassion" shouldn't direct a scientist's working methods, I would be just as wary of a scientist whose worldview was inherently nihilistic or cynical to the extent that it affected his interpretations/analyses.)<br /><br />And now I've taken to commenting on individual sentences. Taking a break from this thread for a bit. Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-74329455240084809872012-12-27T10:49:36.901+05:302012-12-27T10:49:36.901+05:30He might leave things open ended but a wise, compa...<i>He might leave things open ended but a wise, compassionate, open minded scientist a la Stephen Jay Gould he is not, IMO</i><br /><br />Scientists don't need to be compassionate. Their concern must lie with the dispassionate drawing of inferences from testable hypotheses.<br /><br />Scientists don't need to be "open-minded" either. They should go wherever their work leads them without bothering if their inferences "hurt" anybody's sensibilities (be it conservative or liberal sensibilities).<br /><br />Am sure you agree with this.shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-12697764431811195622012-12-27T10:35:54.198+05:302012-12-27T10:35:54.198+05:30I probably should have not used "brain dump&q...I probably should have not used "brain dump" and I apologize. It was honestly not meant pejoratively. It was merely colloquial usage and I was too lazy to think of a substitute. Sorry if you took it any other way, Jai. It wasn't meant as a put down. <br /><br />But I do think all those things about Pinker, more's the pity. Science v. Humanities makes me froth at the mouth. Especially when I see people using their science capital (hey! just coined that, TM that shit, word to Bordieu) to legitimate class bias, misogyny and racism. <br /><br />I wish you and I could engage more on the subject, should you choose to look past my ranty position on Pinker. You should read the American Scientist review though. He might leave things open ended but a wise, compassionate, open minded scientist a la Stephen Jay Gould he is not, IMO. <br /><br />Re Nilanjana, I'm sure you do. I wasn't sure what her email extract was supposed to do in your piece because it was just tacked on at the end, and it was confusing why you didn't engage with it. I wasn't sure what your thoughts are on the things she said. But then I suppose, that wasn't what her extract or your piece was supposed to do anyway, i.e. tie up loose ends. <br />saperahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16553004590976656655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-75119367623619099812012-12-27T10:26:05.816+05:302012-12-27T10:26:05.816+05:30Jared Diamond, Joseph Tainter, et al. ~thinly veil...<i>Jared Diamond, Joseph Tainter, et al. ~thinly veiled darwinists</i><br /><br />Jared Diamond a thinly veiled Darwinist...<br /><br />You make "Darwinism" sound like a radical sect intellectuals should shirk from! While in reality, it is a widely accepted theory.<br /><br />I've read a fair bit of Diamond. He may be a Darwinist, but definitely not a conservative ideologue.<br /><br />He is a serious intellectual who has greatly improved our understanding of hunter-gatherer societies and explained with great empathy why Eurasian cultures forged ahead of African/American cultures.<br /><br />Btw, why this vilification of "conservative" arguments. No conservative here is trying to rationalize rape, which is a despicable and unpardonable crime. <br /><br />In fact one of the basic conservative arguments is - <i>Stop empathising with the criminal. Dispense justice. Stop blaming "society" for all ills</i>shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-46752021260975605202012-12-27T09:31:39.887+05:302012-12-27T09:31:39.887+05:30And Sapera, just one final point (since I realise ...And Sapera, just one final point (since I realise my comment seems like I'm not addressing your actual arguments): in my view, based on a reading of exactly two Pinker books, his assessment of this and related subjects is more open-ended and probing than you seem to think it is. Certainly more open-ended than is suggested by the critique <i>...believing that we do what we do because BIOLOGY! Classic positivist dickbag, in other words who cherry picks evidence to prove that innate gendered behavior is an incontrovertible FACTUAL thing.</i> And if we disagree in our interpretations of his tone/intentions in the first place, then any conversation is likely to become pointless very fast.Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-57897025839468344372012-12-27T08:53:29.839+05:302012-12-27T08:53:29.839+05:30Sapera: thanks for the further thoughts, but I'...Sapera: thanks for the further thoughts, but I'm not going to prolong this conversation in this space: given that you've used a phrase like "thought dump" to describe my post, and given your overall tone, I feel like your stance is more hard-edged than just "disclosing subjectivities". Which is okay, but the discussion is likely to get pointless after a while.<br /><br />Btw, I <i>did</i> read that blog post fully, and said what I had to say after reading it.<br /><br />Also, I respect Nilanajana a lot, but that doesn't make it a given that I would agree with everything she says on this subject. Or that there hasn't been engagement with each other's thoughts outside of this particular post. Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-82876524622134273302012-12-27T06:01:05.633+05:302012-12-27T06:01:05.633+05:30Forums of a critical bent lampoon these things as ...Forums of a critical bent lampoon these things as "biotruths" quite regularly - http://requireshate.wordpress.com/2012/12/13/alpha-males-paranormal-biotruths-and-rape-culture/<br /><br />And most people are receptive towards conservative arguments because it doesn't challenge them at all and they are already full of biases anyway. Even in this comment section, it's amazing how people rattle off, what are at best nuggets of received wisdom as FACT, about how "boys are like this and girls are like that" or essentialize the nature of gendered power across geographic and cultural contexts as whatever their opinions on the subject might lead them to believe. <br /><br />Distortionist received wisdom or phenomenological truth (it's this in MY experience, how could it possibly be anything else?!) aside, if you do choose to write this piece up more formally and explicitly, specifically about the manifestation of rape as a darker side of sexuality (which is extremely interesting and merits extensive discussion to be sure), it would be nice if you made reference to how "dark" itself is a social construction. <br /><br />Or engage with Nilanjana's email more directly. It really seems like you're speaking past each other right now.saperahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16553004590976656655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-75496770108256776042012-12-27T06:00:50.924+05:302012-12-27T06:00:50.924+05:30You're right. Yours wasn't quite a cohesiv...You're right. Yours wasn't quite a cohesive article, and I shouldn't regard it as such. However your thought dump, if I may, had a thesis and drew upon a referent, and it stuck in my craw. I am, of course, glad that you proffer space for disagreement. <br /><br />Pinker like many in his positivist evolutionary biology cohort (Jared Diamond, Joseph Tainter, et al. ~thinly veiled darwinists) are deemed quite suspect by many theorists and are considered deeply controversial in the humanities.<br /><br />Especially critical theorists in the humanities who look at things as social construction mediated by deliberate human intervention by the rich and powerful to reach certain specific ends. Or more broadly, as social relations under late capitalism/neoliberalism or via engagement with libidinal economies. <br /><br />All of these things challenge Pinker's rather simplistic positions on the evolution of human behavior. <br /><br />I think it's unfortunate you didn't find at least some of the things in the blog post I linked to convincing. If you'd read past the "he's a dick" line there were many things that I think would be worth your time to peruse and pursue further, if you really wish to have a more complete picture of Pinker's standing in the larger academic landscape. <br /><br />For example, the author of the blog post fairly convincingly argues about how Pinker uses the word "innate" rather problematically: <br /><br />[Overall, I would have to say that the thing that bothered me the most was his use of the word "innate." He uses this word constantly to describe genes that affect (again, not necessarily determine) our actions. But to me innate, in the sense that he is talking about should apply to all of humanity, not to us presently or as individuals. Sure, to us as individuals presently living, tendencies toward pattern recognition or overprotection toward our children, or any other characteristic could be innate, presently and personally. But to the species as a whole, its entire history and evolutional development, the word innate is troublesome.] <br /><br />This point has been argued by many who challenge evopsych/evobio/neurobiology's positivist streak. Simply put, this notion about inherent tendency is HUGELY problematic, primarily because subjective biases are so built into it (and so often leads to racist/sexist conclusions). <br /><br />And this notion is problematic because of its conservative tendency to defend the status quo as the blog post points out. <br /><br />Just to put a fine point on how it isn't merely a body of bloggy opinionated work that exists on the internetz which is opposed to Pinker, there is a huge amount of legit peer reviewed scholarship (mostly in the humanities, alas) which critiques Pinker's position.<br /><br />(cf. John Dupré - http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/bookshelf.aspx?name=making-hay-with-straw-men&page=1&y=2003&no=1) <br /><br />And sure, there's academic opposition to a lot of different things, but the implications of Pinker's scholarship are so likely to saturate our pop culture with bigoted takeaways about the human condition, that it's critical to engage with the opposition. <br /><br />In another era of early 20th century racist anthropology, someone like Pinker would have been using "science" to demonstrate why blacks are prone to stupidity and violence or poor people are prone to stealing. <br /><br />Pinker and other evolutionary biologists of his ilk are vestiges of anthropologists who would make racist and sexist generalizations based on filling up skulls methodically and systematically (SCIENCE!) with grains of rice and positing extrapolations based on skull sizes. <br /><br />The normalization of this approach via the currency off the scientific method is super ubiquitous in pop culture. SFF, for example is saturated with this kind of problematic so-called science to propound some really awful retrograde bigotry. <br /><br />saperahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16553004590976656655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-43385306375476256182012-12-26T10:33:23.658+05:302012-12-26T10:33:23.658+05:30Shrikanth: and now I'm wondering if I should b...<i>Shrikanth: and now I'm wondering if I should ban you from this comments space for a few days again</i><br /><br />Was I ever banned?<br />And are my comments a "dissipation of male aggression" as you hinted? <br /><br />Maybe. From my own experience, men do rant more often than women on all kinds of issues.<br /><br />But again maybe I am "stereotyping" genders - another male tendency to find patterns and generalize.shrikanthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03898755392584822638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-58709345751988430682012-12-26T10:03:24.461+05:302012-12-26T10:03:24.461+05:30The Internet is another outlet for the harmless di...<i>The Internet is another outlet for the harmless dissipation of male aggression. Eg - internet chat rooms, rediff comments page, pornography etc</i><br /><br />Shrikanth: and now I'm wondering if I should ban you from this comments space for a few days again.Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8204542.post-19359059979621538002012-12-26T10:00:35.633+05:302012-12-26T10:00:35.633+05:30Also, Steven Pinker is extremely suspect as a scho...<i>Also, Steven Pinker is extremely suspect as a scholar. Here is why </i><br /><br />Sapera: I have no problem with reading any cogent, well-expressed argument against Pinker. A basic Google search shows that there are many such - there must be plenty of intelligent people out there who strongly disagree with him (just as there are plenty of intelligent people out there who strongly disagree with anyone else). But I don't see how the link you provide indicates that he is "extremely suspect as a scholar". The first thing the blogger says is that he agrees with much of what Pinker says in <i>The Blank Slate</i>. The second thing he says is "The reason he comes across as a dick is because he is one." Not a particularly eloquent or convincing way to begin a takedown, I'd say. And the rest of the (fairly short and sketchy) post is as speculative and as driven by "lack of humility" as anything Pinker might write in his most casual moments.Jabberwockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10210195396120573794noreply@blogger.com