The study left out the fact that under a patriarchal system parents invest in sons — not daughters. Maybe this explains why giving the family farm to the son was a rational thing to do.
The Chinese had a pretty harsh, yet explicit instruction in this regard:
" On the third day after the birth of a girl the ancients observed three customs: first to place the baby below the bed; second to give her a potsherd [a piece of broken pottery] with which to play; and third to announce her birth to her ancestors by an offering. Now to lay the baby below the bed plainly indicated that she is lowly and weak, and should regard it as her primary duty to humble herself before others. To give her potsherds with which to play indubitably signified that she should practice labor and consider it her primary duty to be industrious. To announce her birth before her ancestors clearly meant that she ought to esteem as her primary duty the continuation of the observance of worship in the home."
18 comments
In a system that favors males... males are favored?
It would seem that Price is making good progress in his remedial kindergarten courses and will soon graduate to concepts like water is wet and fire is hot.
the study was about why girls are attractive to 'bad boys' for those wondering. Used a computer simulation which is supposed to prove that parents would provide more resources for a daughter who married a male who could provide little resources (which somehow translates to a 'bad boy')
I am skeptical how well a simple evolutionary simulation can model the mysteries of the feminine mind.
And a few generations of that shit resulted in the world's greatest sausage fest in turn creating a high stakes, high stress, highly stigmatized and mercilessly cut-throat drive to get married. This contributes to what is the world's highest suicide rate, and wouldn't you know it China is unique in the world that women are more likely to kill themselves than men. By a margin of nearly three to one according to some sources. Your self-important misogynistic whinging is just precious and adorable in comparison to that crushing misery. A little food for thought. Digest it or choke on it, but don't try to feed us any more of your downright biohazardous fare.
I wish these folly-bound idiots would be content to live their own lives rather than trying to trample half the fucking human race just to bolster their egos.
Price's babbling diatribes are irritating, especially since he seems to post little beyond looking for ways to justify his unearned sense of self-importance.
At this point, Price is vomiting up puke he's already eaten more than once.
"The study left out the fact that under a patriarchal system parents invest in sons not daughters. Maybe this explains why giving the family farm to the son was a rational thing to do."
In a gender unequal society, people of the favored gender are favored. Imagine that!
Pop quiz: If the system had been matriarchal, who would have been given the family farm because it 'was a rational thing to do'?
Giving the "family farm" to a son or daughter means that it won't be divided into smaller and smaller bits, and makes sense. Giving a family business to the daughter or son who shows the most interest in the business makes sense. "One owner" is rational, and the sex of the owner needn't play any part in it. (The "eldest son" tradition of, say, British noblemen, is an irrational anachronism.)
Drawing support for your position from old Chinese traditions, though, has nothing rational about it.
Ancient China had Empresses , WTF Price.
Also, Boudica. Queen Elizabeth I.
Meanwhile, in the 21st Century, be afraid...:
image
...be very afraid. >:D
@Kanna
"Giving the "family farm" to a son or daughter means that it won't be divided into smaller and smaller bits, and makes sense. Giving a family business to the daughter or son who shows the most interest in the business makes sense."
Sweet Apple Acres seems to be doing just fine with Applejack running it; as well as the sideline businesses that are related to what that family farm produces. Especially with the wise Granny Smith at it's core . /)^3^(\
Passerby
Not unique in patriarchy but far more zealous in teaching girls they have no value and cannot actually bring pride to the family, merely fulfill obligations. They exist to serve thanklessly and can't even expect the empty platitudes or trophy value somebody like Price would consider flattering to a perfectly dutiful, deferent wife. Even being married into a good family is not seen as an achievement at all. With the one baby policy and clear preference for males that continue the name of the family a girl will have to go through life practically apologizing - in the worst cases actuallly being forced into literal apologies - for being born and their life is considered a burden.
As for why the suicide rate is normally higher amongst men there are two things I think are major contributors: A much higher set of expectations and a reduced willingness to address and discuss emotional and psychological difficulties. Even in more progressive countries other men scoff at the idea of talking a problem out and in "traditional" ones it is taken as a sign of weakness to be ashamed of.
"The Chinese had a pretty harsh, yet explicit instruction in this regard:
" On the third day after the birth of a girl the ancients observed three customs: first to place the baby below the bed; second to give her a potsherd [a piece of broken pottery] with which to play; and third to announce her birth to her ancestors by an offering. Now to lay the baby below the bed plainly indicated that she is lowly and weak, and should regard it as her primary duty to humble herself before others. To give her potsherds with which to play indubitably signified that she should practice labor and consider it her primary duty to be industrious."
image
Seems that the PRC give their women J-20s to play with these days.
Give an educated girl a piece of Stealth material - taken from a downed F-117A - and who knows what'll happen...?!
So, a system that favors men, invests in boys. You DON'T say?
Honey, new-born babies have no language and therefore little or no memory; they won't know that they've been put below the bed or any of that other mumbo-jumbo.
Several decades of the One Child Per Family program has resulted in a huge lack of women, and millions and millions of pampered little man-boys who few women would want, and suddenly it's the men who have to "court" the women, if they want to find a wife. Or get one from abroad...
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
