Male disposability - Revision history

Robert Brockway at 08:48, 7 January 2024

2024-01-07T08:48:04Z

Robert Brockway at 08:48, 26 November 2023

2023-11-26T08:48:58Z

Robert Brockway at 02:55, 23 November 2023

2023-11-23T02:55:33Z

Robert Brockway: /* External Links */

2022-07-05T13:32:52Z

External Links

Robert Brockway at 13:32, 5 July 2022

2022-07-05T13:32:26Z

Robert Brockway at 17:26, 30 April 2020

2020-04-30T17:26:22Z

Robert Brockway at 14:10, 4 July 2019

2019-07-04T14:10:36Z

Robert Brockway at 11:58, 21 January 2019

2019-01-21T11:58:41Z

Robert Brockway at 13:17, 5 June 2018

2018-06-05T13:17:53Z

Robert Brockway at 16:23, 2 November 2015

2015-11-02T16:23:21Z

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 * Men being drafted against their will to fight and die in wars
 * Men being expected to risk their own life and safety to protect women, even women they don't know
-** Women an children first is still observed on some ship evacuations
+** [[Women and children first]] is still observed on some ship evacuations
 * Tolerance for [[male genital mutilation]] even in societies where [[female genital mutilation]] is rejected

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 * Men being drafted against their will to fight and die in wars
 * Men being expected to risk their own life and safety to protect women, even women they don't know
 * Tolerance for [[male genital mutilation]] even in societies where [[female genital mutilation]] is rejected

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Male disposability *does not* imply that societies will wantonly throw away men without a care.  Male disposability does imply that given the choice between losing a male or losing a female societies will generally prefer to lose males.  The loss of both is damaging but the loss of the female was more damaging, at least until recently.
-We humans are now a special case.  The Earth carries more than seven billion people today and could be carrying 10 or 11 billion within a few decades.  We no longer need the ability to rapidly recover numbers, thus any presumed bias towards male disposability that existed in the past no longer needs to apply.  We've won the survival race.
+We humans are now a special case.  The Earth carries eight billion people today and could be carrying 10 or 11 billion within a few decades.  We no longer need the ability to rapidly recover numbers, thus any presumed bias towards male disposability that existed in the past no longer needs to apply.  We've won the survival race.
 Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 == External Links ==
-* https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/defining-demonstrating-understanding-male-disposability<ref>https://archive.ph/W09Pl</ref>
+* [https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/defining-demonstrating-understanding-male-disposability Because It's 2015 Blog]<ref>https://archive.ph/W09Pl</ref>
 [[Category:Featured Articles]]

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 == External Links ==
-* https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/defining-demonstrating-understanding-male-disposability
+* https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/defining-demonstrating-understanding-male-disposability<ref>https://archive.ph/W09Pl</ref>
 [[Category:Featured Articles]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:10, 4 July 2019
Line 8:		Line 8:

	Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.		Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.
		+
		+	Male disposability manifests in society in many ways. Examples include:
		+
		+	* Men being drafted against their will to fight and die in wars
		+	* Men being expected to risk their own life and safety to protect women, even women they don't know
		+	* Tolerance for [[male genital mutilation]] even in societies where [[female genital mutilation]] is rejected

	== External Links ==		== External Links ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:58, 21 January 2019
Line 8:		Line 8:

	Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.		Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.
		+
		+	== External Links ==
		+
		+	* https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/defining-demonstrating-understanding-male-disposability

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:17, 5 June 2018
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Male disposability has a basis in evolutionary theory. When the females of a species invest significantly more energy in to gestation than males, as is the case for humans, then the size of the next generation is largely constrained by the number of fertile females. As a result of this a species can generally tolerate the loss of males more easily than the loss of females. The loss of females will constrain the size of the next generation, the loss of males will constrain genetic diversity.		Male disposability has a basis in evolutionary theory. When the females of a species invest significantly more energy in to gestation than males, as is the case for humans, then the size of the next generation is largely constrained by the number of fertile females. As a result of this a species can generally tolerate the loss of males more easily than the loss of females. The loss of females will constrain the size of the next generation, the loss of males will constrain genetic diversity.
		+
		+	Male disposability does not imply that societies will wantonly throw away men without a care. Male disposability does imply that given the choice between losing a male or losing a female societies will generally prefer to lose males. The loss of both is damaging but the loss of the female was more damaging, at least until recently.

	We humans are now a special case. The Earth carries more than seven billion people today and could be carrying 10 or 11 billion within a few decades. We no longer need the ability to rapidly recover numbers, thus any presumed bias towards male disposability that existed in the past no longer needs to apply. We've won the survival race.		We humans are now a special case. The Earth carries more than seven billion people today and could be carrying 10 or 11 billion within a few decades. We no longer need the ability to rapidly recover numbers, thus any presumed bias towards male disposability that existed in the past no longer needs to apply. We've won the survival race.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:23, 2 November 2015
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.		Male disposability is an artifact of the past and that's where it should stay.
−
−	== Canned Response ==
−
−	With a population of 7.2 billion (expected to top out at 10-11 billion within a few decades) we no longer need the ability to replace numbers quickly. As such female reproductive capacity no longer needs to be protected in order to ensure survival.
−
−	Men and women today can be equally disposable. Society hasn't quite caught up yet but that's the reality of a planet carrying billions of people.