It might be preferable to pretending that we are not animals and share many behaviours with them.
Just to clear up any confusion..
Are you agreeing with wellwisher in regards to his claims catcalling is a male mating call for Homo sapiens?
Do we share catcalling as a behaviour with other animals? Do other animals scream out obscenities or tell passing females to smile and look pretty for them like some human males do?
How do you think human male catcalling is faring, on the evolutionary front that is?
Has there been a time where modern human females were more attracted to the loudest and most vulgar male who catcalled them?
What science has found is that women feel negative emotions when catcalled. To wit, having men sexually harass us is not getting our loins excited and making us want to mate with them. Quite the opposite in fact. Not to mention wellwisher's horrendous contradiction in declaring that women are more visual, and therefore, will respond to the "global male mating call" that is the catcall and street sexual harassment because that's just how men get their junk out there and show it all off. Apparently wellwisher has an issue in understanding what visual actually means.
When you say that "it might be preferable to pretending that we are not animals and share many behaviours with them", catcalling is not beneficial. And
tests have found that in some Howler monkeys who "catcall", as we see it, they have smaller testicles and thus, produce less sperm. I wonder how well this would correlate with human males, seeing that women usually tend to view men who sexually harass them in that way are often over-compensating for 'something' to begin with...
And let's just be honest here, men who are catcalling women are not doing it to get sex.
Look, what I am trying to say is that how you are wording your argument at this time has the appearance that you are agreeing with wellwisher in regards to catcalling and animal behaviours in general, when it comes to women.
And I'm pretty certain that in some cultures human mother do exactly that. By all means attack wellwisher's arguments, but try to get those attacks accurate rather than fact free.
He never said any differently.
He asked wellwisher if
his mother in particular practiced premastication after wellwisher tried to excuse sexual harassment as being acceptable because male birds have particular calls during mating season while trying to argue that catcalling is the human male equivalent "global mating call"..
By all means attack wellwisher's arguments, but try to get those attacks accurate rather than fact free.
I think you need to go back and read what PhysBang actually said and what he was responding to.
Indeed, WTF.
Your statement implied that no human mothers do that.
No, he actually did not.
He was asking wellwisher if he thought that males sexually harassing women was just, and to quote Wellwisher here, "
When male birds sing, they send out a message which can be heard by all suitable and unsuitable mates. Cat calling has precedence in nature.", that if he believed that was the case, then if
his mother fed him like a bird did and whether his mating ritual resembled that of a bird... In other words, wellwisher's argument in his attempt to excuse and applaud sexual harassment is downright stupid. Of course we share many characteristics with other animals, but we have also evolved enough to know that certain behaviours and actions by humans are detrimental and harmful to others (within the human species) and that includes sexual harassment. So I think you are being quite unfair to PhysBang.
Else must we take it that all your observations relate only to individuals who post on this forum. So, yes, WTF. If you wish to mount an attack - on anything - then please use some logic and some facts.
I would suggest you take your own advice in that regard.
PhysBang was quite specific in how he responded to Wellwisher. I think ignoring that and making generalisations about what he said is falling into the same ridiculous generalisations that wellwisher made to excuse sexual harassment and misogyny. Wellwisher's argument would also excuse rape and murder. Because animals do it too. Does that mean that in responding to such ridiculous generalisations that we should not define human behaviour, or in this case, apply wellwisher's arguments to himself? After all, if birds sing to send out a message to be heard by suitable mates who might be attracted to said birdsong, does that mean that he could also say that some species of animals have sex with unwilling females to excuse rape? Birds might sing to attract potential mates, it does not mean that human males should get to sexually harass women because 'birds do it'.. And the reason human males should not do it is because it is detrimental to the human female. Understand the distinction? Wellwisher completely ignores the woman's feelings or response to justify sexual harassment. Frankly, I thought PhysBang's response was very justified. If he thinks that birds sing to attract mates excuses human male sexual harassment, then it is pertinent if his mother premasticated and regurgitated his food into his mouth and if he also exhibits other similar mating patterns and behaviours of birds. In no way does PhysBang's question to wellwisher suggest that human women do not practice premastication. Far from it.
If you seriously thing our biological drives are mythical, I'll say WTF and mark you down as a closet creationist. At least you've finally come out.
That is actually quite offensive and rude.
And frankly, it reads like you are suggesting that sexually harassing women on the street is biologically driven. We know, in fact, many studies have shown that sexually harassing women is quite detrimental to the woman and women who observe it. And it is unlikely to result in the man doing the sexual harassment mating with that particular woman (unless of course he rapes her). So in that regard, wellwisher's comparison is mythical, because it is downright false and simply an excuse for men to sexually harass women.
