5 ms·

The Sexual Life of Savages (2006)

54 points by monort 9y ago

cup 9y ago
I'm sure nigger was a technical term too at one point but it is still racist.
- corey_moncure 9y ago
  What race or races does this term stigmatize?
- exceptOvertures 9y ago
  Okay, get mad at a word.
- angry-hacker 9y ago
  Out of everything you only noticed that? Are you scanning the Internet to be offended somehow? Judging by your commenting history you're at the wrong place. This is not Berkley's women studies.
  - sethherr 9y ago
    First sentence of this is good, the rest is an unnecessary character attack that undermines your point.
    - angry-hacker 9y ago
      It's very much relevant if you're aware what kind of thought control comes out of liberal colleges. The person in question is here only to spread its agenda, nothing else. I have no respect for that kind of people and I encourage others to step up and finally show that you have some balls left.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - cup 9y ago
        Repost your original comment so I can see it.
        DanBC 9y ago
        Go to your profile, and turn on [showdead] to see comments that have been killed. (Remember that the majority are killed by userflags).
      - a-fake-account 9y ago
        You don't have balls left. You are just delusional.
        angry-hacker 9y ago
        I do. You're shadowbanned paid shill.
      - sethherr 9y ago
        I'm quite aware - and I think it's often a useful lense. After seeing the parent comment, I initially was concerned I was in the wrong for finding interesting parts of the piece but the first sentence of your comment reminded me that it was silly to think that. The rest of your comment didn't enlighten me though, it just made it clear that you have an agenda. For the record, I downvoted the og comment and upvoted you - I think your reaction added more to the conversation than their initial criticism.
- pravda 9y ago
  I don't think it was ever a technical term. A technical term would be something like "Mongoloid Idiot". That was considered pejorative, so it became "Down's Syndrome". Then it became "Down Syndrome", because Dr Down did not actually have the condition.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
averagewall 9y ago
This shows that some of the legal restrictions we have on sex are just a reflection of our culture, not actual human requirements. Particularly things like pedophilia, prostitution, and incest. No doubt those savage children aren't traumatized by their sex the way western children are because nobody told them they're supposed to be.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  Pedophilia "can" be extremely damaging. Maybe not 100% of the time but it can mess with your psychosexual development (and delay many other parts of your life) in ways that are hard to describe. That said, it's true that cultural response also costs. Some 2000s movie talked about this, by making too much of a situation, the victim pays a double penalty, and even when the prime suffering goes away, the social stigma and change of lifestyle (relationships) doesn't.
  - averagewall 9y ago
    Yes. These things are difficult to make blanket rules for because everyone's different. Primitive tribes have their own horrible problems for some individuals too. I suppose our laws protect that minority which the islanders would neglect.
  - gizmo686 9y ago
    Are you aware of any research on this subject? It seems very hard (if not impossible) to disentangle the damage of childhood sex caused by social expectations and cultural response from the innate damage of childhood sex. (Even without the obvious ethical considerations of any non observational experiment). Intuitively, I find it hard to believe that there could be any significant innate damage to having sex as early as puberty (when "wild" humans would presumably start). I also do not see an innate mechanism for the age difference to cause significant harm. It is also not at all obvious to me that prepubesent sex would present innate harm; but that, at least, seems plausible (although I still can not think of a mechanism of damage beyond influencing the child's sexuality; which is only a problem if you consider the new sexuality inferior.
cooper12 9y ago
One reason I think everyone should go to college is to gain exposure to cultures completely different from theirs and lose their sheltered and ethnocentric mindset. (the best place to start is on the Nacirema [0]) It's no surprise that the most homogenous and least educated populations are more prevalently racist. (I'm not saying the educated elite are above it though and it was often the most educated who thought they knew best with beliefs like eugenics) One interesting culture [1] we studied in one of my classes practiced ritual cannibalism of their dead. It was highly formalized regarding which relatives eat and had rules for the method of eating. (the meat is cooked so disease isn't much of an issue) After the Brazilian government's FUNAI [2] stopped the practice, one woman described feeling haunted by her deceased kin and not knowing whether their spirit was put to rest. The ritual held huge spiritual significance to the people and provided catharsis after death, yet the government stopped it because it was against their own moral code. This has parallels in how Christian Americans impose their own views on women and others (Manifest Destiny anyone?) who should have autonomy. Another group we studied was male sex workers in (I think) the Dominican Republic. Western men would go there to receive sex from them. The interesting thing is that the workers did not view themselves as homosexual, despite living in such a macho culture, as long as they were the ones not being penetrated. This is contrary to the Western view where any sexual attraction with men means you are gay, while in reality sexuality isn't so binary and clear-cut. Lastly we learned about a Bedouin [3] tribe in which speech is highly restrictive, yet women were afforded more free expression through the medium of poetry. Their culture of modesty actually empowered their women and the narrative is in contrast to that of Western nations which view Middle Eastern women as oppressed and in need of rescuing. (the author, Lila Abu-Lughod, actually has another book titled "Do Muslim Women Need Saving?") The point I'm trying to make with these three groups isn't that their perspectives are the right ones or that we should completely ignore what other groups do in order to let them preserve their culture (many immigrants still believe in beating their children and spouses for example), but rather that we should question our assumptions and preconceived notions and we cannot do that if we stay safely in our own bubbles and hold stubbornly to our believes because "that's the way it always was" or that "it's our heritage". [0]: http://www.ohio.edu/people/thompsoc/Body.html http://www.ohio.edu/people/thompsoc/Body.html [1]: https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/wari/865 https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/wari/865 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funda%C3%A7%C3%A3o_Nacional_do_%C3%8Dndio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funda%C3%A7%C3%A3o_Nacional_do... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin
paulddraper 9y ago
It's very hard to believe that generation after generation after generation, they didn't connect intercourse with pregnancy. I understand the explanations; it still seems unlikely that no circumstances, human it otherwise, would have ever convincingly demonstrated it. Like eating and defecating. The associate theorized they were stupid. I sincerely don't know what to think.
- dTal 9y ago
  Sounds to me like there's too much cultural inertia. They're not stupid, but admitting that sex causes pregnancy means admitting that Bob's wife cheated on him; it means some poor desperate soul really did shag Ugly Betty; it means accepting responsibility for life-changing events that it's much more convenient to write off as "acts of god". The clincher is the fact that they've been informed of the link now, and still won't accept it. That's not stupidity, it's denial.
  - paulddraper 9y ago
    That sounds plausible. Some people might believe the correlation, but not enough to disagree with sun-revolves-around-the-earth prevailing wisdom.
- whack 9y ago
  I actually don't fault them at all for believing this. The only way to know that A causes B, is if you consistently observe the absence of A, paired together with the absence of B. Ie, you need a control group of women in their teens/20s/30s who are not having sex. In societies that frown upon premarital sex, this control group is easily found. But in a society that practices free love, this control group doesn't exist at all. Even worse, the people who you think are in the control group (the wife of the guy who went on expedition, and the "truly hideous" women), are actually having sex secretly, and thus further misleading everyone else. I wonder how many such "obvious truths" we ourselves are missing out on, simply because we haven't done any structured experiments relating to their absence.

54 points by monort 9y ago

cup 9y ago

I'm sure nigger was a technical term too at one point but it is still racist.

corey_moncure 9y ago
What race or races does this term stigmatize?
exceptOvertures 9y ago
Okay, get mad at a word.
angry-hacker 9y ago
Out of everything you only noticed that? Are you scanning the Internet to be offended somehow? Judging by your commenting history you're at the wrong place. This is not Berkley's women studies.
- sethherr 9y ago
  First sentence of this is good, the rest is an unnecessary character attack that undermines your point.
  - angry-hacker 9y ago
    It's very much relevant if you're aware what kind of thought control comes out of liberal colleges. The person in question is here only to spread its agenda, nothing else. I have no respect for that kind of people and I encourage others to step up and finally show that you have some balls left.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - cup 9y ago
      Repost your original comment so I can see it.
      - DanBC 9y ago
        Go to your profile, and turn on [showdead] to see comments that have been killed. (Remember that the majority are killed by userflags).
    - a-fake-account 9y ago
      You don't have balls left. You are just delusional.
      - angry-hacker 9y ago
        I do. You're shadowbanned paid shill.
    - sethherr 9y ago
      I'm quite aware - and I think it's often a useful lense. After seeing the parent comment, I initially was concerned I was in the wrong for finding interesting parts of the piece but the first sentence of your comment reminded me that it was silly to think that. The rest of your comment didn't enlighten me though, it just made it clear that you have an agenda. For the record, I downvoted the og comment and upvoted you - I think your reaction added more to the conversation than their initial criticism.
pravda 9y ago
I don't think it was ever a technical term. A technical term would be something like "Mongoloid Idiot". That was considered pejorative, so it became "Down's Syndrome". Then it became "Down Syndrome", because Dr Down did not actually have the condition.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

averagewall 9y ago

This shows that some of the legal restrictions we have on sex are just a reflection of our culture, not actual human requirements. Particularly things like pedophilia, prostitution, and incest. No doubt those savage children aren't traumatized by their sex the way western children are because nobody told them they're supposed to be.

agumonkey 9y ago
Pedophilia "can" be extremely damaging. Maybe not 100% of the time but it can mess with your psychosexual development (and delay many other parts of your life) in ways that are hard to describe. That said, it's true that cultural response also costs. Some 2000s movie talked about this, by making too much of a situation, the victim pays a double penalty, and even when the prime suffering goes away, the social stigma and change of lifestyle (relationships) doesn't.
- averagewall 9y ago
  Yes. These things are difficult to make blanket rules for because everyone's different. Primitive tribes have their own horrible problems for some individuals too. I suppose our laws protect that minority which the islanders would neglect.
- gizmo686 9y ago
  Are you aware of any research on this subject? It seems very hard (if not impossible) to disentangle the damage of childhood sex caused by social expectations and cultural response from the innate damage of childhood sex. (Even without the obvious ethical considerations of any non observational experiment). Intuitively, I find it hard to believe that there could be any significant innate damage to having sex as early as puberty (when "wild" humans would presumably start). I also do not see an innate mechanism for the age difference to cause significant harm. It is also not at all obvious to me that prepubesent sex would present innate harm; but that, at least, seems plausible (although I still can not think of a mechanism of damage beyond influencing the child's sexuality; which is only a problem if you consider the new sexuality inferior.

cooper12 9y ago

One reason I think everyone should go to college is to gain exposure to cultures completely different from theirs and lose their sheltered and ethnocentric mindset. (the best place to start is on the Nacirema [0]) It's no surprise that the most homogenous and least educated populations are more prevalently racist. (I'm not saying the educated elite are above it though and it was often the most educated who thought they knew best with beliefs like eugenics) One interesting culture [1] we studied in one of my classes practiced ritual cannibalism of their dead. It was highly formalized regarding which relatives eat and had rules for the method of eating. (the meat is cooked so disease isn't much of an issue) After the Brazilian government's FUNAI [2] stopped the practice, one woman described feeling haunted by her deceased kin and not knowing whether their spirit was put to rest. The ritual held huge spiritual significance to the people and provided catharsis after death, yet the government stopped it because it was against their own moral code. This has parallels in how Christian Americans impose their own views on women and others (Manifest Destiny anyone?) who should have autonomy. Another group we studied was male sex workers in (I think) the Dominican Republic. Western men would go there to receive sex from them. The interesting thing is that the workers did not view themselves as homosexual, despite living in such a macho culture, as long as they were the ones not being penetrated. This is contrary to the Western view where any sexual attraction with men means you are gay, while in reality sexuality isn't so binary and clear-cut. Lastly we learned about a Bedouin [3] tribe in which speech is highly restrictive, yet women were afforded more free expression through the medium of poetry. Their culture of modesty actually empowered their women and the narrative is in contrast to that of Western nations which view Middle Eastern women as oppressed and in need of rescuing. (the author, Lila Abu-Lughod, actually has another book titled "Do Muslim Women Need Saving?") The point I'm trying to make with these three groups isn't that their perspectives are the right ones or that we should completely ignore what other groups do in order to let them preserve their culture (many immigrants still believe in beating their children and spouses for example), but rather that we should question our assumptions and preconceived notions and we cannot do that if we stay safely in our own bubbles and hold stubbornly to our believes because "that's the way it always was" or that "it's our heritage". [0]: http://www.ohio.edu/people/thompsoc/Body.html http://www.ohio.edu/people/thompsoc/Body.html [1]: https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/wari/865 https://pib.socioambiental.org/en/povo/wari/865 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funda%C3%A7%C3%A3o_Nacional_do_%C3%8Dndio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funda%C3%A7%C3%A3o_Nacional_do... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin

paulddraper 9y ago

It's very hard to believe that generation after generation after generation, they didn't connect intercourse with pregnancy. I understand the explanations; it still seems unlikely that no circumstances, human it otherwise, would have ever convincingly demonstrated it. Like eating and defecating. The associate theorized they were stupid. I sincerely don't know what to think.

dTal 9y ago
Sounds to me like there's too much cultural inertia. They're not stupid, but admitting that sex causes pregnancy means admitting that Bob's wife cheated on him; it means some poor desperate soul really did shag Ugly Betty; it means accepting responsibility for life-changing events that it's much more convenient to write off as "acts of god". The clincher is the fact that they've been informed of the link now, and still won't accept it. That's not stupidity, it's denial.
- paulddraper 9y ago
  That sounds plausible. Some people might believe the correlation, but not enough to disagree with sun-revolves-around-the-earth prevailing wisdom.
whack 9y ago
I actually don't fault them at all for believing this. The only way to know that A causes B, is if you consistently observe the absence of A, paired together with the absence of B. Ie, you need a control group of women in their teens/20s/30s who are not having sex. In societies that frown upon premarital sex, this control group is easily found. But in a society that practices free love, this control group doesn't exist at all. Even worse, the people who you think are in the control group (the wife of the guy who went on expedition, and the "truly hideous" women), are actually having sex secretly, and thus further misleading everyone else. I wonder how many such "obvious truths" we ourselves are missing out on, simply because we haven't done any structured experiments relating to their absence.