Social/Psyche Question

[quote]KBCThird wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
Um, the historic view of women as a commodity?

i touched on that by using the phrase “share them” and actually had a whole other paragraph about it typed up, but deleted it cuz i felt i took the discussion off on a tangent

Okay, well, tangent or not, I do have background in the areas mentioned, and I’m saying that the commodification of women and the children they bear is the answer to the question.

Not to put too fine a point on it, because i dont think we’re disagreeing at all, but I think that just rephrases the OP’s question from “Why don’t people share their women if doing so would benefit the species as a whole” to “Why dont people share their commodities if doing so would benefit the species as a whole.”

Because people - and any living organism, really - are inherently selfish concerned with their OWN survival and prosperity over that of the group, is the answer.[/quote]

So “because people are selfish” is your answer? Okay, fine. I don’t disagree.

My answer to the OP, as you’ve phrased his question above, is that people do share their daughters. Historically, they do so for a price. Even now, what dad wouldn’t hand his princess over to a wealthy man?

But that wasn’t the question. The question, as I understood it, was “what is the root of this protectiveness men feel for their daughters?” And the answer is protecting the commodity that is her virginity, essentially.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
LiveFromThe781 wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
We want the best genetic line going. You have to prove your worthy to mix genetics. If society let their daughters have low standards, our lineage would be fucked.

Isn’t that the basis for natural selection?

Then the medieval dad would want the biggest, hairiest, most aggressive mate possible for his daughter. Instead, he’s selling her as an infant to the gout-ridden old man whose property adjoins his. Why?

politics? greed?

we’re not talking about selling your daughter to an old guy who has money. that seems to be the opposite of what im saying actually because thats a display of how easy it is to get rid of a daughter whereas im talking about how hard it is to pass her off.

after reading what everyone has posted ive figured it to have something to do with just satisfying the own needs of the father as far as meeting characteristic criteria. what im saying is the father is just going to be looking for someone with certain values or attributes which are totally individualistic but for society theres a collective norm. mentally stable, good apperance, well behaved, similar interests, financially stable. and you probaly dont want him to come off as a douchebag either. i think what that all boils down to is the process of what Reborn and others have been saying.

Well, the thing about selling your daughter is that she needs to be unsullied (worth buying). And THAT is because the man who buys her wants to be assured that any children she bears are his (there’s your nature at work).

You can certainly believe whatever you like, based on anything or nothing at all. But finding a nice chap with “good apperance, well behaved, similar interests” is an historic novelty. That’s never before been the criteria that interests fathers and is frankly laughable looked at from the long view.[/quote]

How would a daughter who is worth buying make it any more probable that the children she bears are the mans children. If anything I would think that the better looking she is the more likely another man would inseminate her besides the man who bought her. Hypothetically speaking. And in your second paragraph you mention that good appearance, good behavior, similar interests have not been the criteria that interest fathers ? I would assume it the very opposite.

My opinion to the Op’s original question is Fathers are protective over there daughters because that is what society has taught us to do. If you were born in a world where every man placed his daughter outside to live and didnt worry about feeding her, or taking care of her and this is all you knew from the time you could see until adulthood, then you would also show the same neglect to your daughter. In short society has taught us to be the way we are.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
Um, the historic view of women as a commodity?

i touched on that by using the phrase “share them” and actually had a whole other paragraph about it typed up, but deleted it cuz i felt i took the discussion off on a tangent

Okay, well, tangent or not, I do have background in the areas mentioned, and I’m saying that the commodification of women and the children they bear is the answer to the question.

Not to put too fine a point on it, because i dont think we’re disagreeing at all, but I think that just rephrases the OP’s question from “Why don’t people share their women if doing so would benefit the species as a whole” to “Why dont people share their commodities if doing so would benefit the species as a whole.”

Because people - and any living organism, really - are inherently selfish concerned with their OWN survival and prosperity over that of the group, is the answer.

So “because people are selfish” is your answer? Okay, fine. I don’t disagree.

My answer to the OP, as you’ve phrased his question above, is that people do share their daughters. Historically, they do so for a price. Even now, what dad wouldn’t hand his princess over to a wealthy man?

But that wasn’t the question. The question, as I understood it, was “what is the root of this protectiveness men feel for their daughters?” And the answer is protecting the commodity that is her virginity, essentially.
[/quote]

I think he was asking for the root of the protectiveness in light of the fact that, to his understanding of biology, it’s counter-intuitive.

So how would you explain a father’s protectiveness towards his daughter in a society where he would have to give a dowry away, rather than receive a bride price? Or would you argue that there wouldnt be the same protective nature in such a society? Also, how do you explain a brother’s protective feelings towards a sister since he doesnt stand to profit from her continued purity?

Nat challenging, per se, just trying to understand

[quote]KBCThird wrote:

So “because people are selfish” is your answer? Okay, fine. I don’t disagree.

My answer to the OP, as you’ve phrased his question above, is that people do share their daughters. Historically, they do so for a price. Even now, what dad wouldn’t hand his princess over to a wealthy man?

But that wasn’t the question. The question, as I understood it, was “what is the root of this protectiveness men feel for their daughters?” And the answer is protecting the commodity that is her virginity, essentially.

I think he was asking for the root of the protectiveness in light of the fact that, to his understanding of biology, it’s counter-intuitive.

So how would you explain a father’s protectiveness towards his daughter in a society where he would have to give a dowry away, rather than receive a bride price? Or would you argue that there wouldnt be the same protective nature in such a society? Also, how do you explain a brother’s protective feelings towards a sister since he doesnt stand to profit from her continued purity?

Nat challenging, per se, just trying to understand[/quote]

Because the purity is believed to have value. Why do men protect their property? Doesn’t an unowned cow still give milk? Why contain it within a fence so other men can’t enjoy the milk freely? Wouldn’t that seem equally “biologically counterintuitive,” as described in the OP? After all, the entire community needs milk and if the goal is survival of species, sharing the milk would seem to serve that end. Indeed, we know that a cow’s supply will even increase to meet demand to some extent.

But that’s not the goal of the individual. Milk is (rightly) believed to have value, so men isolate and protect their cows and other livestock, using what they need and selling off the rest. (To gout-ridden old men, if that’s who has the cash to pay for it.)

In places where a dowry is (or historically was) paid, daughters are treated considerably less well. If purity is still valued in that time/place, then it is protected. If not, not. Fundamentalist Islam does not dote over its daughters, though those fathers will protect purity. (Woe to the girl who is raped, though, because in many cases “protecting purity” = brutalizing the girl herself). In places where daughters are considered a family burden (modern-day China, for one), they are killed.

But going back to the protected daughters, sisters, etc – it is not biologically counterintuitive to hoard resources.

Because we love them and would sacrifice anything for them.

[quote]triple-10sets wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:

Well, the thing about selling your daughter is that she needs to be unsullied (worth buying). And THAT is because the man who buys her wants to be assured that any children she bears are his (there’s your nature at work).

You can certainly believe whatever you like, based on anything or nothing at all. But finding a nice chap with “good apperance, well behaved, similar interests” is an historic novelty. That’s never before been the criteria that interests fathers and is frankly laughable looked at from the long view.

How would a daughter who is worth buying make it any more probable that the children she bears are the mans children. If anything I would think that the better looking she is the more likely another man would inseminate her besides the man who bought her. Hypothetically speaking. And in your second paragraph you mention that good appearance, good behavior, similar interests have not been the criteria that interest fathers ? I would assume it the very opposite.[/quote]

triple-10sets, “unsullied” means in this case that she has not had sex. So I’m talking about protecting virginity so the man who marries her doesn’t worry that she’s carrying another man’s child.

Historically, “good apperance, well behaved, similar interests” have been qualities that appeal to daughters, while wealth (whether that means money or land or a stout pair of goats) is what appeals to their fathers.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Because we love them and would sacrifice anything for them.[/quote]

Stop the crazy talk and admit you’re planning to sell your daughter to Warren Buffet.

[quote]Makavali wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
We want the best genetic line going. You have to prove your worthy to mix genetics. If society let their daughters have low standards, our lineage would be fucked.

Isn’t that the basis for natural selection?

x2[/quote]

Yeah, somebody has to protect them from people like Livefromthe69

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
KBCThird wrote:

So “because people are selfish” is your answer? Okay, fine. I don’t disagree.

My answer to the OP, as you’ve phrased his question above, is that people do share their daughters. Historically, they do so for a price. Even now, what dad wouldn’t hand his princess over to a wealthy man?

But that wasn’t the question. The question, as I understood it, was “what is the root of this protectiveness men feel for their daughters?” And the answer is protecting the commodity that is her virginity, essentially.

I think he was asking for the root of the protectiveness in light of the fact that, to his understanding of biology, it’s counter-intuitive.

So how would you explain a father’s protectiveness towards his daughter in a society where he would have to give a dowry away, rather than receive a bride price? Or would you argue that there wouldnt be the same protective nature in such a society? Also, how do you explain a brother’s protective feelings towards a sister since he doesnt stand to profit from her continued purity?

Nat challenging, per se, just trying to understand

Because the purity is believed to have value. Why do men protect their property? Doesn’t an unowned cow still give milk? Why contain it within a fence so other men can’t enjoy the milk freely? Wouldn’t that seem equally “biologically counterintuitive,” as described in the OP? After all, the entire community needs milk and if the goal is survival of species, sharing the milk would seem to serve that end. Indeed, we know that a cow’s supply will even increase to meet demand to some extent.

But that’s not the goal of the individual. Milk is (rightly) believed to have value, so men isolate and protect their cows and other livestock, using what they need and selling off the rest. (To gout-ridden old men, if that’s who has the cash to pay for it.)

In places where a dowry is (or historically was) paid, daughters are treated considerably less well. If purity is still valued in that time/place, then it is protected. If not, not. Fundamentalist Islam does not dote over its daughters, though those fathers will protect purity. (Woe to the girl who is raped, though, because in many cases “protecting purity” = brutalizing the girl herself). In places where daughters are considered a family burden (modern-day China, for one), they are killed.

But going back to the protected daughters, sisters, etc – it is not biologically counterintuitive to hoard resources.[/quote]

In that case I think we’ve been agreeing the whole time. I took issue with the OPs notion that “instincts” tell us to do what is good for the species as a whole, you took another route in describing WHY protecting daughters is good for the individual and not the species

When individuals thrive, so too does the species.

[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
i thought that well theyre ours but social and instinctual sense would tell us they are crucial for spreading the populus of the species which seems like a conundrum if our main goal as a species is to procreate. [/quote]

“Our daughters”? How many do you have?

Newly minted 21 year old is thinking outside his comfort zone. Good work.

Can someone explain why we have the instinctual need to procreate ?

[quote]RebornTN wrote:
We want the best genetic line going. You have to prove your worthy to mix genetics. If society let their daughters have low standards, our lineage would be fucked.

Isn’t that the basis for natural selection?[/quote]

What makes us care about are lineage ?

I’m sticking to my earlier answer.

When they start dating in high school, we know that the needle-dicked pimple-faced losers they are with have no life experience and have not proven themselves worthy in any meaningful way.

Instead, he’s proven himself in the artificial social construct of school, generally filled with shallow issues of little import during the lives we have afterwards.

However, we also know that love is a strong emotion and there’s a serious danger she’ll end up with sticking with the tard.

No, I don’t have a daughter… :wink:

Think about what runs through your head when you see an attractive young female. I bet one of the first things you think about is sticking your penis inside of her vagina. I bet every other male on this forum also thinks this too, Including me.

Assuming you are following whats excepted in western society you get a job and find a woman to start a family with after you’ve taken your education**** as far as you want to go with it.

You and your wife have a daughter and by the time shes in highschool there is a whole new generation of kids out there that used to think like you. You know this because you thought the same way.

As a dad you now have to deal with a post-pubescent daughter who is aware of and curious about her sexuality and the fact that there are a ton of young guys out there willing to go to great lengths to try to get your daughter to let them stick there penises inside of your daughters vagina.

Sex is a very powerful thing. It was designed to feel very good so that we want to procreate and keep the population going. However there are alot of emotional issues that come with that feeling. Trust, safety, LOVE, concsent etc.

As a dad with a hot daughter your first primal response to all of this is to protect her. You created her and the last thing you want is her to be used by boys who only think with their dicks.

You know, wether you realize it or not, the costs of a sexual relationhip with someone and you’d rather not have your daughter learn all this through being used as sexual objects.

****(the pitiful excuse for formal education that we have)

[quote]triple-10sets wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
We want the best genetic line going. You have to prove your worthy to mix genetics. If society let their daughters have low standards, our lineage would be fucked.

Isn’t that the basis for natural selection?

What makes us care about are lineage ?[/quote]

Bad genetics lead to dead ends. We don’t want our genes weeded out of existence.

[quote]Makavali wrote:
triple-10sets wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
We want the best genetic line going. You have to prove your worthy to mix genetics. If society let their daughters have low standards, our lineage would be fucked.

Isn’t that the basis for natural selection?

What makes us care about are lineage ?

Bad genetics lead to dead ends. We don’t want our genes weeded out of existence.[/quote]

Why not ?

[quote]mthomps wrote:
Think about what runs through your head when you see an attractive young female. I bet one of the first things you think about is sticking your penis inside of her vagina. I bet every other male on this forum also thinks this too, Including me.

Assuming you are following whats excepted in western society you get a job and find a woman to start a family with after you’ve taken your education**** as far as you want to go with it.

You and your wife have a daughter and by the time shes in highschool there is a whole new generation of kids out there that used to think like you. You know this because you thought the same way.

As a dad you now have to deal with a post-pubescent daughter who is aware of and curious about her sexuality and the fact that there are a ton of young guys out there willing to go to great lengths to try to get your daughter to let them stick there penises inside of your daughters vagina.

Sex is a very powerful thing. It was designed to feel very good so that we want to procreate and keep the population going. However there are alot of emotional issues that come with that feeling. Trust, safety, LOVE, concsent etc.

As a dad with a hot daughter your first primal response to all of this is to protect her. You created her and the last thing you want is her to be used by boys who only think with their dicks.

You know, wether you realize it or not, the costs of a sexual relationhip with someone and you’d rather not have your daughter learn all this through being used as sexual objects.

****(the pitiful excuse for formal education that we have)[/quote]

I think you meant so say "kids out there who think like you used to… And nobody thinks with there dicks. Everyone thinks with their brains.

[quote]triple-10sets wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
We want the best genetic line going. You have to prove your worthy to mix genetics. If society let their daughters have low standards, our lineage would be fucked.

Isn’t that the basis for natural selection?

What makes us care about are lineage ?[/quote]

You want your family to be the strongest it possibly can. If your sons are weak, they will not be the best. If they are not the best, then they can be killed off by either physical means or due to not being intelligent enough to thrive in whatever society they are in.

Simply; I care about my lineage because it is all that will be remembered of me when I die. If my blood lives on, I have left my mark on the world. If my line dies, I will be lost to the ages.