Machismo - Words of the World
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 05. 2013
- Is Machismo a negative or positive word?
Discussed by Mark Millington, a Professor of Latin American Studies from the University of Nottingham.
This video was filmed and edited by Sean Riley.
Words of the World is a project by Brady Haran - website at www.wordsoftheworld.co.uk/
See the full list of Brady's video projects at: periodicvideos.blogspot.com/20...
I'm from Argentina, a Spanish speaking country, and here machismo doesn't have any positive connotations. It's mostly thinking that man must be brave and strong to protect women who are weak and emotional.
Maybe other latin americans use the word in a different way.
I'm Spanish and for me "machismo" has not any positive connotation.
I think its hard to say whether "Machismo" or its parent word ("Macho") is Spanish or Portuguese. Quite probably is one of the words that remained unaltered since we had a single (dominant) languge in the peninsula.
The main diference is its pronounciation; to an english speaking person it would sound more or less like this:
Machismo
Spanish: "Matshizmo"
Portuguese: "Mashishmu"
that's a very simplified view of this matter. yes, men do tend to sleep with more women, but at the same time looking after their children, teaching them skills and therefore being in a long term relationship with the mother is also a very good way of ensuring the survival of their offspring, especially as humans take so long to develop
What I meant by "linguistic community" is a group of people who share a language. I didn't mean scholars. Other than that, yes, usage dictates standards. The guy in the video presented you with a standard with which you disagree. You're right, I don't have usage statistics other than my perception. If you think the 'k' pronunciation is more present and deserves more status, I encourage you to go get that proof.
Thank you. and just to note I do believe in equality too. I think of it as apples and oranges, no one can say one is better than the other but no one can say they are the exact same thing either.
I never knew the word 'machismo' in Spanish could get positive connotations. I know the word 'macho' may represent a man that is bold, brave, and have admirable qualities like that... But 'machismo' was always negative, because it's not related to 'macho' as much as it is to 'machista'. The -ism gives it a very negative connotation.
Machismo just mean sexism in Brazil what are you talking about
I think we might be at that point. There are still problems for women in the world but now they are close to the level of problems that men have and we can start working on them together as two equals building a new society.
Societal change is like a pendulum so I expect to see over-corrections before we settle into equality but I do hope that we will see real equality in my lifetime.
Nice one. Very recently here there was a news article about ?two guys who have done a lot of research on the origins of some words, and how they have not changed much in thousands of years (prehistory even) across many languages. I would LOVE if you could maybe cover it in a vid - facinating facinating stuff..
"Algebra" is the latinization of the Arabic word al-jabr. As you can see, completely different words.
Like Bologna (a region in Italy) and Baloney (your whole spiel).
Thanks for playing.
Since feminism emerged, the word machismo lost any positive connotation in spanish (if it ever had any). Now it is mostly used to describe misogynistic and homophobic behaviour.
I suspect the other pronunciation come from people who think it's from Italian, in which case the h would preserve the hard c sound.
I did miscount the phonetic possibilities of 'ch' in English, if that was an issue. But I do NOT think that the 'k' pronunciation is wrong. NOR do I think that it came from an Italian influence. I DO think it's a phonological process that is justified within English itself. It's an opinion, but it's not baseless. This type of confusion is very common in uncommon words, in any language, and I've seen it happen with the English 'ch' twice before.
I will choose to have a small number of kids with one parent because I want to pass on my worldview, culture and wisdom more than I want to pass on my genes.
Genetics play a bigger part than we want to admit but they still play a small part in how we act, that is what makes us special and makes me somewhat proud to be human.
I wish you wouldn't judge my argument by how compelling it is (as the word "compelling" may evoke sentiment, as opposed to logic), but by how reasonable it is.
Yes, there are many assumptions in both theories. The dialectal explanation assumes that the word not only was considerably common in speech, but also considerably more common in the speech of Italians, to a point that its occurrence was so overwhelming that it was able to become the standard of non-Italians as well. It does sound less likely to me that the influence would go from dialect to language than from language itself. The influence of English on English is greater than that of Italian.
Well, I didn't mean to suggest that there's something wrong with the Italian pronunciation. I was just saying that the fact that some English speakers pronounce this word with a K sound is more likely due to their opting for the K sound out of the two options offered by 'ch'. I say that because machismo is not a common word, and many people would have come across it in writing without having heard it before, that's something that happens. But the loan aspect might be right instead, I don't know.
For an Italian word describing the positive aspects of Machismo described in the video, try "Virtù".
That's how we pronounce it in Portuguese, with a 'sh' sound, it doesn't come from French, though. I didn't think you weren't aware of the 'ch' possibilities, and even prior to that, I wasn't concerned with whether you were a native English speaker or not. I was talking about the origin of the 'k' pronunciation in English, as I think it's more likely to have come from an internal process, not as a loan. And most of all, I never meant to convey that any pronunciation was correct or incorrect.
Of course, the correct pronunciation of an ENGLISH word borrowed from SPANISH is like ITALIANS do, because of reasons.
3:15 Those "gay men" looked pretty dominant to me...
Certainly also a possibility, more likely or not. Both pronunciations are fundamentally correct, though, so it's a moot point. It would not be surprising if both facts had something to do with it. I always thought it was pronounced ma-keys-mo because that's how my Dad's side of the family says it, and they're Italian.
And I speak English, man. Don't you think I'd already be aware of those things? There's also the "sh" option from French, by the way (e.g. machine), so we have at least 3.
Equality is something you have to fight for, if you don't achieve equality in the fight then you are not as strong* and thus are not equal.
But if you look deeper then you wonder, since women are as strong* as men why weren't they equal for most of human history? Seriously there has to be a good reason and I think it would shed a lot of light on human history.
*not by strength I don't just mean physical, I mean overall strength, including intelligence and character.
It would be fine, if it were an Italian word. It isn't.
Your point is just as valid as borrowing the Japanese promunciation.
I think maybe you jumped into that a bit two-footed. Its only a visual aid, so picking the most recognised depiction is surely the best? It's just a passing photo to provide some visual stimulation.
it's funny he is a stickler about pronunciation of 'ch' as 'k' yet says 'mætʃoʊ' instead of 'matʃo' as it would be pronounced in spanish
Well, the main criteria that linguistic communities use to decide what's right and what's wrong in their languages is usage. The 'k' pronunciation is certainly much less common than the other one. I think he handled it politely enough. He could have just said "there are these two pronunciations" and nothing else, but it's only natural for him to wish to discard one of the options because that's not a variation that is freely allowed in English.
In my region (Pacific Northwest, USA), or at least within my social circles, the word "machismo" carries no inherent positive or negative connotations. Whether it's offered as a complimentary or derogatory observation is determined entirely by the context in which it's given.
Cheers, it nice to have intelligent discussions on YT :) As I said originally, feminism at first was named due to females being the oppressed sex and nowadays women as still slightly discriminated against, for example in unequal pay or cultural double standards. But yeah, personally I believe we should get rid of any terms like feminism or even humanism, and just let society sort itself out because these terms are demeaning to us all.
Well, as I explained before, there are other advantages to both parents being present in the child's upbringing that result in better survival. If it wasn't the case we and other animals wouldn't have evolved to have these long term relationships that sometimes last a lifetime. They were common long before social norms said it should be the case.
And I know about genetics, trust me, but I also know about epigenetics and psychology and these are very important factors in human evolution.
In English, 'ch' sometimes sounds like a k, in words like chaos and christ. So it's understandable that unusual words may get these different pronunciations. I think that's a more probable reason.
Exactly my point. :) Just a passing photo that correlates the term "gay men" with the visual of "garish bondage guys". And despite its short appearance it's been chosen deliberately by the editor to convey a certain mesage.
Take it or leave it, but the trivial aspect of that sequence makes it all the more troubling in my opinion.
Yeah, because we borrowed words from Spanish, French and Italian, among many others. On top of that, Italian immigrants to America would have known the word. We do not know how this (also correct) pronunciation entered English, and I wasn't claiming that was the reason. Your claim that confusion with pronunciations in words like "chaos" is more likely is baseless, either way, and it doesn't change the fact that it's false to suggest there's anything wrong with the Italian/Romanian pronunciation.
I guess the 'Mak' pronunciation comes from the fact the the written word looks Italian (think of Machiavellian for example)
I meant that the Portuguese pronunciation doesn't come from French. If the intention of your original post was to say that there were other correct ways to pronounce machismo in English (which would already show how defensive you are, what with nobody having said anything about wrong or right) then I may have misinterpreted it, as I thought you mentioned Italian as a reason why there is a 'k' pronunciation in English. Yes, it's my opinion, not a fact, as I've been stating since my first reply.
And I've seen it happen that one pronunciation is more common in a certain location and therefore becomes the first pronunciation an individual remembers as "correct". That we've seen these things happen does not mean one or the other is more likely. My understanding of the word's meaning certainly came from growing up around Italian family, so it can and does happen. We don't know, it's probably both. Let's stop this, please.
I think there has been a lot of misunderstanding going on, here, on both sides. No one was being defensive, first of all, just disagreeing. Second of all, I was responding to this:
"opting for the K sound out of the two options offered by 'ch'."
and simply noting that there are not only 2 options. I know nothing about Portuguese. I never accused you of claiming it's fact, I am saying that your claim that it is more likely, opinion or not, has no basis.
I'm a Spanish-speaker and it's the first time I've heard that the word machismo has positive connotations.
In comparison to what you presented, the confusion explanation would indeed be more likely, because it pertains English as whole, referring to a variation in its very phonology. While the dialectal / geographical variation would be much more restricted, even physically, within that scope of English phonology. It's much less likely that one dialect influenced the whole, than it is that the whole influenced all but one dialect. It's still possible, though. Hey, if you want to stop, don't ask me.
And the gentleman in the video very strongly suggests that the alternate pronunciation is less correct, whether he says it outright or not.
also I was saying that there is little difference between black and white and a larger difference between male and female.
Now, we can't rule it out at the moment - consciousness is still a huge mystery to scientists - but persistent souls sound pretty ridiculous to me. I think you misunderstood me. When talking about personality, consciousness, diversity, mental complexity, etc humans are special - because we evolved that way (with huge brains, great social skills, language, tradition of knowledge, etc). When talking about flight, I would argue the same way that birds and insects are special and dominant species.
When a guy does anything with any sort of flare, there's bound to be a feminist making a snarky remark about compensation. That's one reason machismo doesn't have a positive connotation. There are many reasons, of course, but that's what springs to mind first. Machismo almost means 'trying too hard.' The ironic-mustache fad illustrates the disingenuous air some people have attached to overt manliness.
But that question "why give up privilege' is interesting. Maybe you don't want to/have to? Be a sociopath, who's to stop you?
But maybe you care about wives, mothers, daughters, sisters, and friends. You have a stake in more than just yourself! Sometimes men want to prevent wife-beating (not a crime once) or don't want the women in your life from getting fired because of pregnancy. Strict roles that keep women at home and men at work may interfere with your relationship with your own family.
yep. I am ill prepared to go into a debate about determinism but I do tend to think that laws that govern natural selection and evolution still play a part in modern society.
remember that 90% of our huge complex brains exist in apes as well, the part that makes us different and conscious is only a recent addition...
Question, so what is the male version of the feminist? Is there a word for positive male support?
Is the female archetype of society so ingrained in us that everything male is wrong or lesser?
I've always pronounced it "makismo", I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone pronounce the "ch" as a normal "ch", then again I suppose the connection to "macho", where the "ch" is pronounced normally, was pretty obvious.
The pronunciation "ma-KEY-smo" is the way Italians pronounce the word. And yes, it is fine.
It's natural if you're a prescriptivist and think that language is dictated by objective rules. It isn't. Usage dictates standards, not the other way around. Language is born from our attempts to communicate, not handed down from the linguistics community; it's something they study, not something they assess to determine "what's right and what's wrong". Ask a lexicographer.
Do you have stats to support the idea that the "k" pronunciation is less common? It's all I've heard for most of my life.
"...from the first appearance of the term in English that I can find (Griffith 1948:50-51), machismo has been associated with negative character traits not among men in general, but specifically among MEXICAN, MEXICAN AMERICAN and LATIN AMERICAN men. Contemporary popular usage of the term machismo in the United States often serves to rank men according to their presumably inherent national and racial characters. Such analysis utilizes nonsexist pretensions to make denigrating generalizations..."
Presumably it would be "Masculist".
Assuming that the "female archetype of society" is ingrained in us to the point that masculinity is regarded as wrong or lesser is backwards; masculinity is still regarded by many as superior, but it is a _silent_ superiority - that is, masculinity is regarded as preferable until someone says otherwise. Thus, though we only ever hear about the pseudo-feminist "all things masculine are wrong" point of view, male superiority is still very much abundant.
Brady, can you make a Video about BBQ and why it is used by the Americans for the word "Grill"?
Also, why they like so much the BBQ-souce :)
Doncha love the word "denigration"?
To be clear, while I do blame you for ignoring substantive issues, I don't dislike you for holding divergent views. I don't know you well enough to see how you treat women. I assume you're a great husband, son, brother, father, and friend to the women in your life. I assume you don't mistreat the women you meet day to day.
This is (so far) only about broad strokes of policy and culture. So why is it so important for you to to defend the injustices (to women) in it?
Sorry recombination must mean something different in relation to biology, I just used the standard google definition.
If you have a gene the predisposes you to a type of cancer then it will be random whether or not your child will get the gene, but it is a 50/50 chance if.
But yes it isn't that simple since some genes when put together do good things but don't when only one is present, genetics is very messy and it will take 100 of years or more to see patterns good or bad.
Clear is not a colour, a clear object simply doesn't interact with photons and therefore has no colour at all. The sky is black precisely because there aren't enough photons, that's the definition of black.
Of course we could get into the semantics of just what the sky actually is. I hold the word to mean the panorama of the heavens, which conveniently rules out any atmospheric phenomena.
Also, I agree with you, arguing semantics makes for a great pastime. :D
very good points and I agree with most of them.
I still contend having all of your children survive is bad for the gene pool. Best to have 7 kids with one woman and have the 4 strongest survive and be raised in a stable household, and this was the norm for most of history without modern medicine.
You also leave out the possibility that the first ten kids had full families with the mother cheating on the "father" which is also the norm in most long term animal "relationships".
It seems to me like "manly(ness)" is somewhat analogous to the positive Spanish meaning of "machismo".
Very well presented. The Spanish meaning is simply more evolved. Western thought has been corrupted by the fallacious "perpetrator /victim" mentality. Both men and women express their strength but in different ways. The Spanish meaning encourages nobility and lovingness .
As far as gathering data, I'm sorry but I really must leave that to you, as you seem to be in an English-speaking country. It's actually something I would enjoy doing, as I find it very instigating. But it's much, much easier for you. I'd suggest you take a dictionary, count all the words that begin with 'ch' and how many have a 'k' sound. Then go around asking people to pronounce 'machismo', whether they know it or not, and count that too. That's not the most strict way to do it, though.
Indeed and it is good to remind ourselves once in a while. There are few - if any - easy answers, when it comes to human psychology. Still, scientific method compells us to not resort to easy answers. Popper taught us, that we can only hope to invalidate a hypothesis, eg by showing someone who claims that all swans are white a black swan. I don't have many answers. But I can show via some "black swans" that it is not as easy as binary gender defining personality. Thanks for debating btw :-)
feminism as they describe it in the video is a fine and great thing since it is just the promotion of equality.
It is funny though to specify one gender in the word for supporting gender equality.
It just seems like the right time to re-brand the pursuit of equality since feminism has been kinda hijacked, in america at least, by people with differing views. Kinda like in the video about neo-cons.
Thank you for the intelligent and well thought out response :)
Romanian too.
And why so much hate for sociopaths? It is a recognized mental health condition. Why do you hate someone for their illness? Nobody hates people with cancer or down syndrome, what makes sociopathy so special and deserving of your hate and derision?
I used the word 'apologize' to refer to the things you were defending. I think you should apologize for writing the things you wrote. The fact that you don't leads me to associate you with the asshats. So I'm not asking you to apologize for things you didn't do.
But you've decided to defend yourself instead. Your choice, and your right. But when you complain about being associated with the asshats, I'll point to *your* choices, and how you've used *your* rights.
If you want to get technical wouldn't the sky be clear, not black? you only perceive black when you don't receive enough photons to see something.
Semantics is a fun game to play as long as no one takes it personal.
I know that might not have made much sense :), I know that this channel made a video about feminism, you could go and watch that if you're still wondering :)
srsly? I don't hate sociopaths, though I do think that a rational response to the damage they do involves some coercion.
The great thing about you and DrSusher is that the more you talk, the less sense you make. It really exposes your earlier comments as the cray-cray talk it is.
This will be my last comment here - I have a life to live - but I encourage you to mock me one more time, just for the sake of showing the studio audience where your line of reasoning ends.
I don't find it compelling because I don't find it reasonable. Do people encounter it more frequently in writing? Is it as uncommon as you say? There are many assumptions inherent in your argument that are not self evident, and it is because of these that I don't find the argument compelling, it's the premises that are unconvincing, not the logical validity of the argument. That's why I say I'll stop here: to make a convincing case would require much more space than is available here.
No I divide race into three groups depending on the level of Neanderthal DNA that they have as well as muscular-skeletal differences as well as thousands of years of culture, which is the part I think is most important.
I don't care about our genetic races, I care about culture. As long as in the mixing of cultures some good things aren't lost then I am fine.
for example I am more concerned with native american culture going extinct than I am with the "race" as a whole.
Yes I know. The relative levels of both hormones affects both men and women. Gender, sexuality, humanity none of it is black and white just many different shades of grey.
Yeah, sure. It's nice and easy to think of humans as just another animal. But we happen to be the dominant species of the planet; as far as we can tell the only one that is completely self-aware. So clearly something is different (note: I don't claim it to be better, just different). With humans personality is more defining than gender, I feel. How do you explain masculine women and feminine men? And then there is the whole crew of trans-people. What constitutes "male"? Genes? Brain? Behaviour?
Does bravado come from Spanish?
Also I think you misunderstand the issues faced by women who try to report abuse. Try talking to one, and instead of telling them how easy they have it, listen to them describe how hard it is.
The fact that you'd rather debate the point is part of the problem they face. If you were alone, it would be no big deal to ignore you. But you aren't alone. Most men (it seems) have this underlying resentment of how easy women have it.
I heard once or twice.....call my PA if you want to speak to me (among friends)...wth! some men take it to the next level, which seems already extreme the word machismo.
Hm, that's more of an argument of why modern medical advances impede evolution, not stable long term relationships. And that might be true to some extent, however, we can't deny that, for instance, people are getting more intelligent with each generation, so this stability is probably working. Plus you have to take in mind recombination, the kids will still have a fair amount of variation.
One could even argue that inbreeding is good for the gene pool by your reasoning.
I really don't find that argument compelling, and we're not going to hash this out in CZcams comments, so I'll stop here. We haven't convinced each other, and that's fine. Have a good one.
The reason why women may someday rule the world is that there are more men who think women should rule the world than their are women who think men should rule the world.
There are two types of fairness a man could hope for, one that he has the same advantages his father and his grandfather before him had and two that he has the same advantages as a woman.
You can understand why some men are angry about the world they were born into right?
That is sad. I believe in equality but the fight for it has caused so much damage.
We are both equal but those who say we are or should be the same, destroy the valuable traits that each gender has.
Why do you think these cultures and views developed in the first place?
of all the comments I have made to this video this is the least debatable.
Either you believe in Evolution, God, or little green men making us.
I know that most faith doesn't mix with feminism well so I have to assume that you think that your "willpower" which is a product of billions of years of evolution, is strong enough to overcome the forces that made you exist in the first place.
I also didn't say one way was better than the other, so why all the hate?
The sky isn't blue. seriously. It's actually black, the blue is caused by raileigh scattering of sun light in the atmosphere, so the blue actually comes from the sun, not the sky.
As for the effects of hormones on thought patterns, I totally agree with you. Shockingly, people with different brain-chemistry act differently, whodathunkit eh?
Interesting lecture as always.
But what caught my attention was what happened when he said the words "gay men".
You didn't show a male couple in civilian clothes holding hands or kissing. To clearify the term "gay men" you used a photo of men dressed in garish carnevalesque bondage gear parading down a road in some sort of Gay Pride parade, arguably the most recognised depiction of male gay culture today.
If this trivial edit is any indication being gay will never be normal to straight people.
That's completely wrong, recombination is random, there will be random distribution of roughly half of your genes between your kids, it's impossible to say how many will have "worse" or "better" traits. It's more likely that the different traits, some advantagous, some not, will be distributed randomly between your kids.
Maybe you're mixing it up with recessive traits?
I dunno where you get your knowledge on genetics, but I'd advice getting a better textbook
I see your point, but feminism, at least in a liberal sense, is still relevant to our society. Men were put on pedestals back in the day and had all the restrictions and expectations that you would expect but it was the norm then, so no one questioned it. In its true sense feminism is about striving for equality between men and women so will protect men from discrimination too, however when it was first created women were the oppressed sex and they needed to tote femininity as a positive banner.
creo que no
At the risk of sounding sexist I do have to ask one simple question. If men and woman are equal, then how did men gain control of the world in the first place?
I think the most common answer would be men are physically stronger and gained control when strength was all that mattered, but I don't think that is all of it. Woman are smart and strong and could have been in control if they wanted to, I think it might be possible they chose not to for some interesting reason.
A lot of times reality is more effected by perception than by facts. If the perception is that women are discriminated against, then they will be to some extent. hypochondriacs can make themselves sick just be obsessively worrying that they are sink.
Not saying that is what is happening I just wanted to put that out their.
if I have 10 kids and only put in minimum time and only 3 reach adulthood I am still better off genetically than if I only had 4 but spent time and they all reached adulthood, because the three will be the strongest in order to survive without my help and thus more likely to have children that are stronger.
Having multiple partners would just be not putting all your eggs in one basket.
Sorry, didn't see your whole thread, so my response was not informed by context.
No, not "everything is an attack". Some things are, some aren't.
Your questions need more than 500 chars in response. You probably need to learn about the real world from sources other than CZcams comments.
I do not understand anything in that last sentence: genetic standpoint? why is polygamy important? why is it women who need to raise children? what quote are you talking about?
Lol. I love that argument. Yup, I'm totally the sexist one here.
I'm not denying that there are some difference between men as a whole, and women as a whole, but the differences are so tiny that, quite frankly, it's stupid to see them as different entities. There are plenty of women who can grow facial hair, and plenty of men who can't.
Excerpt from "The Meanings of Macho (Men and Masculinity)" by Matthew C. Gutmann.
There's this funny thing called reference. Can you produce an earlier account of the word from any language that's not Spanish, baloney boy?
So, I didn't bring up North Korea as an example of gender (in)equality. I brought it up to compare personal liberty between PDRK and USA, to show how foolish it is to say "It's worse for (women/people) in that other country, so shut up about problems you face here."
Did you really mean to blame PDRK society dissolving on *women getting more power*? It seems to me that there might be some other issues at play in that country, but I'm not the self-proclaimed expert you seem to be.
The word "machismo" is not only originated only from Spanish. The word came from Latin "masculus", that turned into "masclu/masculu" in Vulgar Latin and then turned into "Macho" (Manly in English) and from there to "Machismo" and this word is used both from Spanish and Portuguese languages, not only Spanish, and also very similar in Romanian/Italian and French. So please next time do NOT refer a word that is originated to one "country/language" without knowing the REAL ORIGIN from a word.
Then lingerie, or bruschetta, or penchant, or any number of other words spelled the same but pronounced differently. We can play this game as long as you like, and you'll still be missing the point, and if you think spelling is relevant here, you're a fool or deliberately changing the subject.
You don't really seem to understand what sexism is.
Yes my logic is on one far-ish end of the spectrum, just as yours is just as far from center on the other side. Neither of us is crazy enough to be discredited but we are both wrong. Only the people in the center have the right of way and there are some of those in the comments.
The difference between you and me is that you really believe what craziness you say and I say what I say just to try and balance out people like you and bring the average to the center.
What a distortion of feminism.
Male version of a feminist: Feminist.
Positive male support: Feminism
Female archetype in society: Madonna/Whore dichotomy
Male is wrong or lesser: Delusional.
There are two ways to dehumanize someone: pushing them down or fetishizing them and punishing deviations from perfection. The idea that "women are perfection" and "men are just human" sounds like it puts men down, when actually it is extremely controlling of women, and allows freedom and autonomy for men.
I agree that you could argue that quite well. But then you would have to define "woman" and "man" and that opens up a whole new can of worms. Because both genetically XX and XY people show such a vast range of physical and psychological diversity... it seems rather ridiculous to lump all these very different people into two categories and assign arbitrary meaning to them, regardless of their actual dispositions and behaviour.
So everything is an attack by men or society on women?
How was the idea that men were superior not that same as putting them on a pedestal and controlling them?
Shouldn't a view that men and women are equal be "humanist" rather than feminist or Masculist?
The female archetype of society (from a genetic standpoint) is one without polygamy where society is stable and provides women with good environment to raise children. damn it is hard to explain without the quote.