"Morally' violent?

[Hermit]

morality as a concept is not an all or nothing proposition. Perhaps the glimmerings of it exist in chimp society, and I would expect that as hominim brain size increased, some form of basic cognitive reflection involving compassion, guilt and other emotions to slowly emerge. It did not spring fully formed from, for example, the ancient greeks...

Oh yes indeed. More generally, I no longer think of the difference between homo sapiens and other life hominids as being a sharply distinguishable, categorical one. There is no thin line between one and the other.

[Blind groper]

[Rape reproduces my DNA. If I need to kill a rival over it, so be it. Self interest in action. Added bonus: killing weaker rivals increases the average strength of the rest of the cohort. All good. I have moral justification.

Actually, no.

Over most of the 200,000 years humans have existed, women have been protected by family and tribe. If a man rapes a woman, the odds against that turning into successul reproduction are high, and the consequence is that he gets his throat cut or his balls removed. Neither conducive to survival!

The only form of rape that actually leads to increased reproductive opportunities without a major risk is raping the females of defeated enemies, or those such women taken as slaves. Of course, through history, this kind of rape is very common.

[cronus]

Have you factored in Stockholm Syndrome? Many women marry men not out choice but rather fear, insecurity and tiredness. If a man pursues a women ruthlessly full of ardour and she finally relents is that free will?

[Blind groper]

Scrumple

Stockholm syndrome requires a period of being close together, and becoming familiar. This probably applies to the last case of rape I mentioned, when a woman is taken slave and repeatedly raped.

It would not apply to the case of a tribesman raping a woman in his tribe. Such a man would not get a second chance. And the result would be an evolutionary change to avoid this kind of rape. Evolution would not act against rape of slave women or rape of enemy women after the enemy is defeated.

[Seth]

Yes, I agree with Jim. I do not think that there is any objective component to 'morality'. Morals, like courtesy, human rights, and principles, are arbitrary. They evolve socially as a part of the human experience. The basis of morality is the suggestion that people should care for each other, and this arises from the fact that humans are a gregarious species of ape that cooperates.

Mind you, the fact that these facets of our existence are arbitrary does not mean they lack value. Morals, courtesy, human rights and principles are vitally important. They help human survival, and they help our social structure to hang together.

So then non-ape species have no morals? That seems to be a very anthropocentric view of morality? Is that what you're suggesting, that morality only applies to human beings?

Seeing as it is an intrinsically human construct, yes! Other animals may act in a way that we consider "noble", "moral" or "altruistic" but they have no concept of morality. except cats, of course. THey know the difference between good and evil, they just don't give a shit, because evil is far more fun.

How do we know that animals have no concept of morality? What about dolphins, which have arguably shown a degree of interspecies morality by rescuing drowning humans. How about elephants who mourn their dead? Can you really say that they cannot have a concept of what is "right" and what is "wrong?"

[Seth]

Scrumple

Stockholm syndrome requires a period of being close together, and becoming familiar. This probably applies to the last case of rape I mentioned, when a woman is taken slave and repeatedly raped.

It would not apply to the case of a tribesman raping a woman in his tribe. Such a man would not get a second chance. And the result would be an evolutionary change to avoid this kind of rape. Evolution would not act against rape of slave women or rape of enemy women after the enemy is defeated.

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

And then there's Bonobo monkeys, who "rape" one another as a social custom and practice.

I'd like to see some authoritative references supporting your thesis BG.

[Blind groper]

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

This is exactly what I was referring to. The women taken will be from 'enemy' tribes, and will adapt as the Stockholm Syndrome tells us, to become members of their 'adopted' tribe.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

This is exactly what I was referring to. The women taken will be from 'enemy' tribes, and will adapt as the Stockholm Syndrome tells us, to become members of their 'adopted' tribe.

I was hearing a terrifying report on the radio the other day. Apparently, there is a growing trend in sub-Saharan African countries where guerrilla wars are being fought for women to be raped and then either murdered or genitally mutilated. Women were interviewed that had had their vaginas attacked with axes, knives and hammers and even some that had been shot several times in their pubic region. There didn't seem to be many that had subsequently integrated...

[Seth]

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

This is exactly what I was referring to. The women taken will be from 'enemy' tribes, and will adapt as the Stockholm Syndrome tells us, to become members of their 'adopted' tribe.

But you asserted that anybody trying to rape someone would be beat up or killed. This is patently not true.

[Seth]

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

This is exactly what I was referring to. The women taken will be from 'enemy' tribes, and will adapt as the Stockholm Syndrome tells us, to become members of their 'adopted' tribe.

I was hearing a terrifying report on the radio the other day. Apparently, there is a growing trend in sub-Saharan African countries where guerrilla wars are being fought for women to be raped and then either murdered or genitally mutilated. Women were interviewed that had had their vaginas attacked with axes, knives and hammers and even some that had been shot several times in their pubic region. There didn't seem to be many that had subsequently integrated...

In tribal warfare the objective is to destroy the other tribe, so destroying that tribe's reproductive capacity is an obvious tactic.

[laklak]

Fucking ground apes. Not a one of them worth a shit. Shoot 'em on sight, that's my advice.

[JimC]

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

This is exactly what I was referring to. The women taken will be from 'enemy' tribes, and will adapt as the Stockholm Syndrome tells us, to become members of their 'adopted' tribe.

But you asserted that anybody trying to rape someone would be beat up or killed. This is patently not true.

If you read what he posted more carefully, he was referring to rape within a tribal group, not that of captured enemies...

This is an interesting assertion given the fact that many primitive societies even today practice ritual kidnapping and rape of nubile young women, and have been doing so for many thousands of years.

This is exactly what I was referring to. The women taken will be from 'enemy' tribes, and will adapt as the Stockholm Syndrome tells us, to become members of their 'adopted' tribe.

I was hearing a terrifying report on the radio the other day. Apparently, there is a growing trend in sub-Saharan African countries where guerrilla wars are being fought for women to be raped and then either murdered or genitally mutilated. Women were interviewed that had had their vaginas attacked with axes, knives and hammers and even some that had been shot several times in their pubic region. There didn't seem to be many that had subsequently integrated...

In tribal warfare the objective is to destroy the other tribe, so destroying that tribe's reproductive capacity is an obvious tactic.

Surely it would be better to keep them captive, make them pregnant, and add to your own tribe (which does happen quite often)

The mutilations and vicious murders speak of unreasoning hatred in a place where normal social groupings have disintegrated...

[Blind groper]

To Jim
Most definitely. Taking an enemy woman captive, integrating her in the tribe and bonking her is widely practised among those we call primitive. It was very common among the old time Maori, before missionaries arrived and spoiled the fun.

As far as mutilating the genitals of a captive woman.....
Let me add that one to the long list of irrational and cruel acts by religion.

[Seth]

To Jim
Most definitely. Taking an enemy woman captive, integrating her in the tribe and bonking her is widely practised among those we call primitive. It was very common among the old time Maori, before missionaries arrived and spoiled the fun.

As far as mutilating the genitals of a captive woman.....
Let me add that one to the long list of irrational and cruel acts by religion.

Um, FGM is practiced on a tribe's OWN WOMEN (children actually) and is a cultural as much as religious thing. The sort of mutilation mentioned here is a savagery intended to make sure that the woman never reproduces again and has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with barbarity.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

To Jim
Most definitely. Taking an enemy woman captive, integrating her in the tribe and bonking her is widely practised among those we call primitive. It was very common among the old time Maori, before missionaries arrived and spoiled the fun.

As far as mutilating the genitals of a captive woman.....
Let me add that one to the long list of irrational and cruel acts by religion.

Um, FGM is practiced on a tribe's OWN WOMEN (children actually) and is a cultural as much as religious thing. The sort of mutilation mentioned here is a savagery intended to make sure that the woman never reproduces again and has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with barbarity.

Seth's right, BG. What I was describing wasn't carried out by religious groups. It was rival gangs of rebel militias in Congo, Sierra Leone, etc.