![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
libertangofrom an online discussion group I'm in:
So, what is it I'm documenting?
The woman to whom I'm commenting has a husband. Said Husband tends to go ballistic at odd moments.
A recurring pattern seems to be this:
* Wife asks a somewhat newbie-ish question.
* Responses come in, of a wide variety of views. They're phrased in an innocuous way, so that only a true delusional paranoid would take umbrage.
* Husband comes along, takes umbrage at how we're "picking on his Wife", thereby giving us a splendid example of delusional paranoia.
* Many hasty apologies are made to Husband and Wife, mostly along the lines of, No, we didn't mean that personally, we're just trying to answer the silly question.
* Wife makes apologies for having caused so much fuss. Husband growls in corner. The rest of us await the next outburst.
* Rinse, lather, repeat.
What's amazing about all this is that She seems like a reasonably intelligent and capable human being. But His reactions would seem to indicate He has zero faith in Her ability to stand up for Her own thoughts or opinions. That pathology seems to reinforced by a whole, "Milord this," and "Milady that".
(I'm sorry. I know John and Bjo Trimble. If they can use SCA-style terms without being nauseatingly cutesy, you can learn from their example, eh?)
Anyway, what I'm documenting is the innocuousness of my reply, above. 'Cuz my bet is, the fur is about to fly.
Originally posted by XYZ:
Isn't jealousy natural to some extent though? The natural reaction to fire is fear. Fear protects us from being hurt. Does jealousy serve the same purpose?
-----------------------------------------------------
"Natural" is one of those labels I have real troubles with. Mostly because I flip flop so strongly on the nature-nurture thing.
It seems to me that for something to be "natural", it would also have to be universal. Given that I don't feel jealousy about my relationships, and given that I don't have the chutzpah to think myself unique in this, that would seem to indicate that jealousy is a learned response, and I skipped class yet again that day.
But leaving all that aside... What is it you think jealousy protects people from? What is its practical value? I'm curious, because I don't know of any real answers for those questions.
So, what is it I'm documenting?
The woman to whom I'm commenting has a husband. Said Husband tends to go ballistic at odd moments.
A recurring pattern seems to be this:
* Wife asks a somewhat newbie-ish question.
* Responses come in, of a wide variety of views. They're phrased in an innocuous way, so that only a true delusional paranoid would take umbrage.
* Husband comes along, takes umbrage at how we're "picking on his Wife", thereby giving us a splendid example of delusional paranoia.
* Many hasty apologies are made to Husband and Wife, mostly along the lines of, No, we didn't mean that personally, we're just trying to answer the silly question.
* Wife makes apologies for having caused so much fuss. Husband growls in corner. The rest of us await the next outburst.
* Rinse, lather, repeat.
What's amazing about all this is that She seems like a reasonably intelligent and capable human being. But His reactions would seem to indicate He has zero faith in Her ability to stand up for Her own thoughts or opinions. That pathology seems to reinforced by a whole, "Milord this," and "Milady that".
(I'm sorry. I know John and Bjo Trimble. If they can use SCA-style terms without being nauseatingly cutesy, you can learn from their example, eh?)
Anyway, what I'm documenting is the innocuousness of my reply, above. 'Cuz my bet is, the fur is about to fly.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
nature vs nurture, jealousy
Nature= genetic
Nurture= environment
First, I want to point out that in order for something to be "natural", or genetic, it does not have to be universal. Certainly not all people have the same genetic make up, just like we don't all have the same hair color or facial features. There is variation in genes just as there is variation in environment.
Also, most evolutionary biologists would agree that characters, whether they be morphological, behavioral, or otherwise, are affected by both genetics and environment to varying degrees. In fact, the nature-nurture debate is pretty much a dead issue.
The behavioral character in question here, called "jealousy", leads a person to protect a mate from perceived extra-pair relations. To me, this would definitely have an evolutionary significant function. However, how potential relationships might be perceived depends on many things, including past experience. Certainly how someone decides to go about "protecting" their mate will vary and is affected by many things, also.
One example: Male birds guard their mate from other males. The male knows that female birds will copulate with another male if given the chance and if that male is perceived as being "sexy" or fit. The bird with highest number of eggs in the nest wins. Surely you can see how this applies to humans as well, in a round about kind of way.