> Partnership males are ready to negotiate, the negotiations are social and online. Are Gaza, Ukraine, Somalia and ISS in Syria examples of partnership males h

> Partnership males are ready to negotiate, the negotiations are social and online. Are Gaza, Ukraine, Somalia and ISS in Syria examples of partnership males having social and online negotiations? I ask only because they are examples of the person you are responding to: a group of males deciding the risk of the death and destruction of everything they hold precious is preferable to what they have now. To me it looks more like two groups of males fighting to near death for the privilege of running some godforsaken plot of land. The policy is scorched earth. Society, farms, food, schools are disposable pawns in the game. The women and their needs and wants are irrelevant, except as a source of children to feed the armies. Recently we've seen the USA start down the same road, electing a narcissist who openly bragged about how he demeaned women while on the campaign trail. Maybe they like his attitude to women (and many of the other pillars of modern society), but I suspect it was more a case of just wanting change, and those things matter less than the change they were after. I'd love if it males really did start solving their problems with social and online negotiations. But history, even recent history is not kind to that view. "The Goodness Paradox" proposes a very different theory to how we got to where we are now. It posits that males solved their problems over the millennia by murdering each other. The paradox is that created evolutionary forces leading to males who were kinder and gentler to others in their village. But to males outside that group, it was always scorched earth, winner takes all.