If you agree with live and let live, maybe instead we are disagreeing about "socially enforced monogamy" means. At the second link Sheluyang Peng gave above, Peterson writes:
"The dangerousness of frustrated young men (even if that frustration stems from their own incompetence) has to be regulated socially. The manifold social conventions…
If you agree with live and let live, maybe instead we are disagreeing about "socially enforced monogamy" means. At the second link Sheluyang Peng gave above, Peterson writes:
"The dangerousness of frustrated young men (even if that frustration stems from their own incompetence) has to be regulated socially. The manifold social conventions tilting most societies toward monogamy constitute such regulation... Normative monogamy seems to have important group-level benefits, and tends to reduce the kinds of harmful behaviors associated with greater intrasexual competition, among both males and females."
I don't interpret terms like "normative monogamy" as live and let live. When I read this, I immediately think about divorcees shunned from church congregations, men with STIs refusing to get tested to avoid social stigma, and pregnant young women ejected from their parents' homes: https://sleepbaby.org/im-pregnant-and-my-mom-kicked-me-out/
It looks like this package is a bullet that Jordan Peterson is willing to bite for the sake of decreasing violence.
I think "socially encouraged monogamy" is a much nicer phrase than "socially enforced monogamy".
In general, I think you are bringing up a question that is both very interesting, important and difficult. I'm complaining that Western females compete in a toxic way through conspicuous beauty measures and casual sex offerings. But in other societies, females compete just as toxically over who is the most virtuous.
Finding a way to decrease a certain kind of competition without just replacing it with another kind of competition is equally difficult as important.
If you agree with live and let live, maybe instead we are disagreeing about "socially enforced monogamy" means. At the second link Sheluyang Peng gave above, Peterson writes:
"The dangerousness of frustrated young men (even if that frustration stems from their own incompetence) has to be regulated socially. The manifold social conventions tilting most societies toward monogamy constitute such regulation... Normative monogamy seems to have important group-level benefits, and tends to reduce the kinds of harmful behaviors associated with greater intrasexual competition, among both males and females."
I don't interpret terms like "normative monogamy" as live and let live. When I read this, I immediately think about divorcees shunned from church congregations, men with STIs refusing to get tested to avoid social stigma, and pregnant young women ejected from their parents' homes: https://sleepbaby.org/im-pregnant-and-my-mom-kicked-me-out/
It looks like this package is a bullet that Jordan Peterson is willing to bite for the sake of decreasing violence.
I think "socially encouraged monogamy" is a much nicer phrase than "socially enforced monogamy".
In general, I think you are bringing up a question that is both very interesting, important and difficult. I'm complaining that Western females compete in a toxic way through conspicuous beauty measures and casual sex offerings. But in other societies, females compete just as toxically over who is the most virtuous.
Finding a way to decrease a certain kind of competition without just replacing it with another kind of competition is equally difficult as important.