The Savior's Restored Gospel and feminism

[nuclearfuels]

On 9/5/2023 at 6:46 PM, The Nehor said:

On 9/5/2023 at 12:30 PM, ksfisher said:

Biologically, women and men perform different roles in propagating our species.  In general, the role of women is to care for and nurture children, while that of men is to protect and provide for the children as well as the women who are raising them.  There are many other species outside the primate family that have similar divisions of labor.  To argue that one of these roles is superior to the other ignores the importance of both in the survival of any species.  These roles are ingrained in us by evolution.

This is fundamentally wrong. The idea that men have always been the providers is countered by just about all of recorded history. Having your wife not have to work was throughout most of human history a luxury afforded to the wealthy. Naturally as more people got wealthy they took up the practice as a sign of their wealth. In the past roughly 80-90% of the population were involved in agriculture and both men and women worked in that role. Yes, women did tend to take care of the very young children and often took up work that allowed them to feed young children but that is primarily because women lactate. But that is more about convenience than being some hard-coded biological imperative.

Many Church leaders (and lots of other people) love to pretend that early 20th century American and Western European norms are some eternal law but they just aren’t.

@ksfisher - how dare you cite biological facts which support the Family Proc?

@The Nehor - claiming things are fundamentally wrong and sharing jokes doesn't strengthen your argument. Empirical objective, verified and validated data, studies, etc. do.

And while "Many Church leaders (and lots of other people) love to pretend that early 20th century American and Western European norms are some eternal law but they just aren’t" - when you're in a leadership position and want to inspire people to be the best they can, you cite examples of people and cultures who did the same. That's why these norms, cultures, and peoples are often referenced.

Lactating is in fact a hard-coded bioloigcal imperative - for the continuation of our mankind, as the Family Proc states: that commandment to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force.

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Never heard of it. 

Would enjoy the rabbit hole or bread crumbs

This is not a quote from me, it’s a quote from Buckeye. I don’t know why it came up under my name. He might not see it since it’s not connected to his quote.

[ksfisher]

On 9/5/2023 at 4:46 PM, The Nehor said:

This is fundamentally wrong.

I disagree.  Notice I said "general."  Also, the roles can look different in different societies and men and women can assist in each other.

 

On 9/5/2023 at 4:46 PM, The Nehor said:

In the past roughly 80-90% of the population were involved in agriculture and both men and women worked in that role.

Never said women weren't involved in agriculture.  Never said men didn't assist women in their role, or women assist me.  In some hunter gatherer societies studies have shown that it is actually women who put more calories on the table than the men.  Nevertheless, the men see providing as their role and they go about it differently than the women.  The women do more gathering; fruits vegetables, grains, etc, while the men hunt.  Both types of food are needed.

 

On 9/5/2023 at 4:46 PM, The Nehor said:

Yes, women did tend to take care of the very young children and often took up work that allowed them to feed young children but that is primarily because women lactate. But that is more about convenience than being some hard-coded biological imperative.

Exactly.  Primates have evolved so that women lactate.  That sounds pretty hard-coded to me.  I'm not sure what you're meaning about convenience.  I guess primates could have evolved so that men and women lactate, or only men.  But that isn't the case.

Again, I'm speaking in broad generalities here.  There are always exceptions and adaptations.  Homo sapiens are successful because they adapt and cooperate.

 

I'm feeling like my thoughts are pretty disorganized here.  I don't think there's really a very wide separation in how we're looking at things.  I feel like you're looking at things from an agricultural society perspective, while I'm looking at them from that of a hunter gatherer society.

[The Nehor]

On 9/8/2023 at 10:04 AM, ksfisher said:

Never said women weren't involved in agriculture.  Never said men didn't assist women in their role, or women assist me.  In some hunter gatherer societies studies have shown that it is actually women who put more calories on the table than the men.  Nevertheless, the men see providing as their role and they go about it differently than the women.  The women do more gathering; fruits vegetables, grains, etc, while the men hunt.  Both types of food are needed.

What? You insist that men have the provider role while admitting women often provide more and prove this by arguing that that is how men in hunter-gatherer societies see themselves based on what? Guessing?

On 9/8/2023 at 10:04 AM, ksfisher said:

Exactly.  Primates have evolved so that women lactate.  That sounds pretty hard-coded to me.  I'm not sure what you're meaning about convenience.  I guess primates could have evolved so that men and women lactate, or only men.  But that isn't the case.

Again, I'm speaking in broad generalities here.  There are always exceptions and adaptations.  Homo sapiens are successful because they adapt and cooperate.

 

I'm feeling like my thoughts are pretty disorganized here.  I don't think there's really a very wide separation in how we're looking at things.  I feel like you're looking at things from an agricultural society perspective, while I'm looking at them from that of a hunter gatherer society.

That is not a hard-coded psychological imperative. By convenience I mean that some provider roles are easier to perform while being available to feed children. In a lot of societies that meant creating clothing which was easy to pick up and put down. 

I am looking at things from a general perspective. There is nothing in most of history to support the Family Proclamation’s statement as being some generalized norm. It is based on industrialized society and a very specific cultural version of it.