The new way of life for the amazons?

[borntohula]

Perhaps this could be the next step for the amazons.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...drelationships

The women hunt and the men take care of the babies.

[borntohula]

No? No one? How is this not interesting? Is equality intimidating?

"According to the data he began collecting more than two decades ago, Aka fathers are within reach of their infants 47% of the time - that's apparently more than fathers in any other cultural group on the planet, which is why Fathers Direct has decided to dub the Aka "the best dads in the world"."

"Aka fathers will slip into roles usually occupied by mothers without a second thought and without, more importantly, any loss of status - there's no stigma involved in the different jobs.""

[Silvanus]

Maybe Heph could rig up something like this:
http://greatinventions.tv/home/produ...breastfeeding/

[borntohula]

Maybe Heph could rig up something like this:
http://greatinventions.tv/home/produ...breastfeeding/

-WOAH!

But the other bits (outside sucking on male tits) is quite cool right? The lads does the things ladies does without any stigma or problems with it.

I wouldn't mind such ideas being promoted in WW. That alot of things in the gender roles are just inventions of society. Also a great way of selling it, that sharing (mother duties) is caring

[Agent Z]

I suppose it's an idea that could work, but it's all in the execution.

[Blacksun]

pretty cool fathers sharing responsabilities with mothers without it being a downgrade. In my country men only get a 5 day off when the baby is born, too little time with the baby.

[Lax]

Perhaps this could be the next step for the amazons.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...drelationships

The women hunt and the men take care of the babies.

I can see why this article would appeal to feminists.

Males assuming the female role supposedly upgrades them to "best fathers in the world" status, yet females assuming the male role doesn't downgrade them into becoming the "worse mothers in the world".

Thus, spending less time with offspring is only considered a negative trait for fathers.

Other mothers went hunting with their newborns strapped to their sides, despite the fact that their prey, the duiker (a type of antelope), can be a dangerous beast.

The reason this isn't considered wildly irresponsible parenting is because "girl power".

Why she would need to do this with the male playing mom back home is a mystery.

What's fascinating about the Aka is that male and female roles are virtually interchangeable. While the women hunt, the men mind the children; while the men cook, the women decide where to set up the next camp. And vice versa: and it's in this vice versa, says Hewlett, that the really important message lies. "There is a sexual division of labour in the Aka community - women, for example, are the primary caregivers," he says. "But, and this is crucial, there's a level of flexibility that's virtually unknown in our society. Aka fathers will slip into roles usually occupied by mothers without a second thought and without, more importantly, any loss of status - there's no stigma involved in the different jobs."

It strikes me as a less effective method of survival.

I wonder if this tribe has ever been at war with a culture that had traditional gender roles.

[Razor Tiara]

Nah. Get them dudes off the island asap. I can't stand them. I get that progression needs to be shown, but not that way.

[Dr. Hurt]

Nah. Get them dudes off the island asap. I can't stand them. I get that progression needs to be shown, but not that way.

I second this. At the end of the day, it's Paradise Island. It's like adding pigeons to the batcave. It just doesnt work.

[borntohula]

I suppose it's an idea that could work, but it's all in the execution.

Absolutely. And it wouldn't be any fun if it happened over night either. But it could be something to aspire to.

I can see why this article would appeal to feminists.

Males assuming the female role supposedly upgrades them to "best fathers in the world" status, yet females assuming the male role doesn't downgrade them into becoming the "worse mothers in the world".

It's not the Aka people that written the article :P "Thus this makes us the men of Aka, the greatest fathers in the world."

Why she would need to do this with the male playing mom back home is a mystery.

One thing doesn't rule out the other does it?

It strikes me as a less effective method of survival.

I think helping each other out is quite a good way of surviving. The article also states that they're totally flexible and cool with taking on different jobs regardless gender.

If they go to war with another tribe, I can't see any of the things the article describes becoming problems. As said, they're flexible. Not locked.

pretty cool fathers sharing responsabilities with mothers without it being a downgrade. In my country men only get a 5 day off when the baby is born, too little time with the baby.

In my there's more or less a law that states that you must use at least 30 days of over 100s of days that you can take off when becoming a father.

Nah. Get them dudes off the island asap. I can't stand them. I get that progression needs to be shown, but not that way.

I second this. At the end of the day, it's Paradise Island. It's like adding pigeons to the batcave. It just doesnt work.

I'd actually wouldn't mind if they did, as long as there's a good story. As Hephaestus says: "Mistakes are history." Since they're the mothers of Zeke now. That alone could easily be worked into a reason.

And regardless the outcome, the amazons will hereafter probably be more open to other means to reproducing than going out on raids.

[Lax]

It's not the Aka people that written the article :P "Thus this makes us the men of Aka, the greatest fathers in the world."

I was referring to the feminist writer's agenda, I'd agree that the Aka people are oblivious pawns in all of this.

Our quality of life is vastly superior yet there's no mention of anything the Aka could learn from us. Why? Because in spite of our success the writer feels the Aka have chosen the correct path based on his world view and thus, we should emulate them.

I find his agenda and the inconsistent standards used to support it off putting. He frames his article as if he's concerned about the well-being of children, he makes it known that the Aka men are superior fathers to their western counterparts on the grounds that they act like women and spend more time with their offspring. Yet this cannot happen in a vacuum, hunting outside of the tribe must still be accomplished or the tribe will starve.

So if women are leaving the tribe to fulfill that necessary duty, why doesn't the loss of time with their offspring make them inferior mothers to their western counterparts? Because if he suggested that other feminist would eat him for breakfast and he knows it.

It gets better, not only do the Aka women get a pass for spending less time with the offspring, but they're celebrated for doing the same duty that men were responsible for all along. It's amazing how appreciated the more dangerous job becomes once women start doing it.

One thing doesn't rule out the other does it?

You know, in the bible it says "No servant can serve two masters." and I find that an appropriate analogy here.

The feminist writer is trying to serve two masters, one is called "Women", the other is called "Children", and the one who is owed no allegiance is called "Men". One narrative is called "egalitarian parenting" which serves Children, the other is called "single motherhood" which serves Women. But the problem with having two masters is that there is inevitably a conflict of interest.

So a question emerges, when push comes to shove who does this feminist writer truly serve? The answer is Women.

When the feminist writer says that Aka men are superior fathers because they act like women and spending more time with offspring it is a message that serves Children. When that same feminist writer is silent about Aka women being inferior mothers according to his own logic that is a message that he serves Women above all, including Children.

Nothing illustrates this strict hierarchy quite like...

Other mothers went hunting with their newborns strapped to their sides, despite the fact that their prey, the duiker (a type of antelope), can be a dangerous beast.

... this statement.

The feminist writer is so focused on his girl power single motherhood narrative that he has inadvertently dropped the illusion that the child's welfare is the top priority. The danger of the situation is only relevant as a way to prop up how impressive the female accomplishment is, reducing the newborn to some kind of fashion accessory to make the achievement more glorious.

In a nutshell, says O'Sullivan, men are scared of intimacy with babies and small children - and it could be that looking anew at that fear, with reference to the Aka experience, could be a useful and liberating male experience.

You put forth an idea, call men cowards for responding poorly to your idea, then claim agreeing to your idea will be "liberating". I suppose it wouldn't be feminism without shaming tactics.

So if a man is repulsed by the idea of letting a baby suck his nipple, like a woman, but without her justification, it's primarily because he's "scared of intimacy" with his own child? Because now that you've found one obscure tribe consisting of 10,000 males who engage in this behavior, the ultimate symbol of intimacy between man and child has become nipple sucking.

Men are not women, and some of us don't aspire to be women.

[Javier Velasco]

Please bring this back to Wonder Woman. General discussions about feminism do not belong on this board.

Thank you,

Javier

[Silvanus]

Our quality of life is vastly superior yet there's no mention of anything the Aka could learn from us. Why? Because in spite of our success the writer feels the Aka have chosen the correct path based on his world view and thus, we should emulate them.

It could also be because the writer doesn't expect the Aka to comprise a large portion of his audience. Why should the writer tell us, the audience, what someone else could learn from us? We might find this flattering or even encouraging, if we need an ego boost, I suppose; but, in general, shouldn't we be more interested in what we can learn from other people?

Similarly, Wonder Woman, in 36, points out that the "stagnant" Amazon culture can learn something from its exiled men. She didn't say whether the men can also learn something from the women; I bet they can, but pointing that out wouldn't particularly help Diana make the case to the women about why they should open the island to their brothers.

In the story as a whole, though, I think it would be interesting to see the male and female Amazons learn from each other. If some of the women begin to become interesting in technology and mechanical arts, will some of their sisters look down on this, stigmatizing those interests as mere "men's work"? If some of the men start to show interest in the Amazons' more aggressive pursuits, will some of their brothers criticize those pursuits for what they might call "bloodcurdling femininity" (inverting the phrase Marston used to describe what was wrong with a long of male superheroes)? I think it would be cool if they don't necessarily switch gender roles but slowly and haltingly become more "flexible," as the article says the Aka are. Let them learn that gender roles don't fit everyone equally, and people should be true to themselves, not necessarily to their gender.

[borntohula]

I think it would be cool if they don't necessarily switch gender roles but slowly and haltingly become more "flexible," as the article says the Aka are. Let them learn that gender roles don't fit everyone equally, and people should be true to themselves, not necessarily to their gender.

I think the flexible bit is key. As I said before "One thing doesn't rule out the other.".

Japan is an interesting country in that way. The economical situation basically demands more equality, which rearranges both of the gender roles.

Here's a video on the topic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBGPgPyIUbg

Just to clarify. I'm not suggesting that Paradise Island needs embrace western economics. I'm suggesting that the situation is interesting.

[Lax]

Please bring this back to Wonder Woman. General discussions about feminism do not belong on this board.

Thank you,

Javier

Noted.

It could also be because the writer doesn't expect the Aka to comprise a large portion of his audience. Why should the writer tell us, the audience, what someone else could learn from us? We might find this flattering or even encouraging, if we need an ego boost, I suppose; but, in general, shouldn't we be more interested in what we can learn from other people?

It stems from western men being singled out as the target audience to begin with.

The author has proven himself to be quite international in his pursuit of writing about a culture that epitomizes his view of the "best dads in the world". Yet he is mysteriously domestic in his pursuit of a culture that would epitomize the "worst dads in the world" by that very same logic.

Namely, middle eastern men, especially as their culture is already a well known commodity on the international stage in comparision to the obscure Aka. When a writer can scour the planet to find a story that will support his world view, then neglects to aim his message toward the cultures that would, by his logic, need his message the most, there is something wrong with that picture.

With such a bias focus on what western men need to learn from other cultures, I find it more than fair to ask what other cultures need to learn from western men.

Otherwise improvement becomes a one-way street where even asking that question becomes tantamount to western men needing an "ego boost" as oppose to having values or ideas that other cultures could benefit from.

Similarly, Wonder Woman, in 36, points out that the "stagnant" Amazon culture can learn something from its exiled men. She didn't say whether the men can also learn something from the women; I bet they can, but pointing that out wouldn't particularly help Diana make the case to the women about why they should open the island to their brothers.

Wonder Woman is in a very difficult position.

The truth is that the cultures the Amazons need to learn from are the ones of "Man's World", but that would be an unimaginably bitter pill for her hateful sisters to swallow. They simply aren't ready to hear that and Wonder Woman knows it.

That's why, to sweeten the pill, she focuses on men who have blood ties to her sisters even though these men should logically know even less about peacefully coexisting with the opposite sex than the Amazons would.

She's seen the outside world, she knows that suggesting the Amazons and exiled men learn from each other is like the blind leading the blind, but it's a necessary excuse for her to get her foot in the door because it's pretty much the touchiest subject her culture has.

Yet even as she tries to spoon feed this to her sisters they are busy conspiring behind her back. Looks like a coup d'etat is in the works for the young queen if solicits are worth anything.

In the story as a whole, though, I think it would be interesting to see the male and female Amazons learn from each other. If some of the women begin to become interesting in technology and mechanical arts, will some of their sisters look down on this, stigmatizing those interests as mere "men's work"? If some of the men start to show interest in the Amazons' more aggressive pursuits, will some of their brothers criticize those pursuits for what they might call "bloodcurdling femininity" (inverting the phrase Marston used to describe what was wrong with a long of male superheroes)? I think it would be cool if they don't necessarily switch gender roles but slowly and haltingly become more "flexible," as the article says the Aka are. Let them learn that gender roles don't fit everyone equally, and people should be true to themselves, not necessarily to their gender.

I think they'd segregate each other, although it would be interesting to see how long it would take for lust to weaken their resolve to stay apart.

"No one will ever win the battle of the sexes; there's too much fraternizing with the enemy." - Henry A. Kissinger