The second link I include about the Mosuo culture living in China seems to be matrilineal
Han Chinese tend to assume that Mosuo women are whores and Mosuo men are pimps. Anthropologists, who we should believe because they have tenure, assure us otherwise.
He’s signalling contrarianism, specifically an anti-progressive political attitude. Note that the first sentence is a statement, and I would bet a large amount of money that it’s true, based on no more evidence than I’ve seen on this page. The second sentence is pure snark.
90% of right-wingers here often talk so as to get it—but somehow, being less Sam-like, they manage to do so NOT at the expense of our community and the level of debate. Therefore, they only rarely get downvoted. Hell, you’re often sympathetic to such things; shouldn’t you try to censure Sam for undermining your and your fellows’ image?
What justifies my position is that for another supposedly matrilineal society that academics love as absolutely wonderful and highly functional, the Mosuo, folk wisdom is that it is composed of whores and pimps, similar to the culture celebrated in rap music and game blogs, where there is no significant transfer of consumables to women and children, and large transfer from women and children to a minority of men. Thus in addition to sociobiology, I have folk evidence, evidence from low status people, that academics are making stuff up.
He explained it in another post. To be honest if when I first read this I was a step or two nearer to him in inferential distance I would have probably found the comment witty. Considering he has spent some effort to shorten the chain, I’m changing my vote on it.
Han Chinese tend to assume that Mosuo women are whores and Mosuo men are pimps. Anthropologists, who we should believe because they have tenure, assure us otherwise.
What is the point of this statement?
He’s signalling contrarianism, specifically an anti-progressive political attitude. Note that the first sentence is a statement, and I would bet a large amount of money that it’s true, based on no more evidence than I’ve seen on this page. The second sentence is pure snark.
Hey don’t be too hard on him, a man needs to get his metacontrarian fix somewhere!
90% of right-wingers here often talk so as to get it—but somehow, being less Sam-like, they manage to do so NOT at the expense of our community and the level of debate. Therefore, they only rarely get downvoted. Hell, you’re often sympathetic to such things; shouldn’t you try to censure Sam for undermining your and your fellows’ image?
He explained it in another post. To be honest if when I first read this I was a step or two nearer to him in inferential distance I would have probably found the comment witty. Considering he has spent some effort to shorten the chain, I’m changing my vote on it.