Re: Coordinating Sex Roles
Sun, 6 Apr 1997 05:36:26 -0400 (EDT)

In a message dated 97-04-06 05:03:18 EDT, Lcrocker writes:

> How "we" should teach "children" about "roles in
> society" is an irrational concept from the start.

Of course we respect individuals choice in the roles they chose. And the way
they bring up their children. This thread is not about enforcing gender
roles, it is about rationally analyzing them. Choosing values instead of
accepting ( perhaps not so useful?) traditional ones without thinking.

' We' is a word which can be inclusive of one or more persons. How we should
do things is a very rational topic , from businesses - to families, to
societies, to individuals, and it is not 'collectivist'. That would entail
enforcing our ways upon you. Coercion has not been suggested.
I would see extropians as one rational "we" (group), and also my wife and
I, or my society and I, and "we' are always discussing how things should be
done. Even Objectivists and Libertarians talk about how "we" do things.
Can we talk about what "we" should do about space exploration? Freedom of
speech? Technological advances?

>>What I will
>teach my son or daughter is how to best exploit his or her own
>natural talents and predispositions, whatever they might be, and
>how to deal with others openly, honestly, and fairly to achieve
>whatever his ends might be.

Changing how we do things, especially as "A SOCIETY", is helpul, for
dysfuntional societies form a large part of the darwinistic pool against (or
with ) which our individual concepts must swim.
To censor a forum about such an important issue, especially one that involves
our future- as children do- is IMHO, more collectivist than allowing free