Do you younger guys agree with this article?

[CuckingFunt]

Absolutely. I'm merely pointing out that the animalistic, predatory instincts are still with us (some more than others), despite the centuries-old striving to be "civilized". Obviously comparing humans and animals isn't apples-to-apples, but no one should ever discount just how much behavior we have in common.

It is important to remember how much behavior we have in common, yes, with certain animals. For all the talk of humans' inbred, animalistic, predatory instincts, it's not as if we share a single genetic link with lions, or bears, or velociraptors. For that reason, the analogous connection that is often made between man's inhumanity to man and a lion stalking its prey on the savannah is a bit of a stretch, regardless one's take on evolutionary theory.

[ElNono]

Every moment we live is largely governed by instinctive thinking. Why do people take prescription/psychoactive/recreational drugs?

But that's not instinctive at all. Otherwise everybody would be mindlessly taking such drugs. You choose to get high/take a drug. You don't instinctively do.

Why do people talk about sex every day?

Do animals talk about sex every day? A instinctively sexual reaction would be to actually have sex whenever you think about having sex. That's what animals do/try to do.

Why are there people ting all over each other in this thread to bolster their self-esteems?

Looks like trash talking to me, with some interesting tones here and there.
I'm pretty sure their lives will more or less remain the same after they walk away from the keyboard.

[greyforest]

I'm merely pointing out that the instinct is the impetus for those actions - not that rationality isn't used. Rationality and instincts are always at odds with each other.

I'll use your example. Say a person isn't just hungry, they are starving to death. They will act MUCH less rationally than a hungry person, as instincts grow stronger and mute out rationale.

People are highly variable as to what their threshold is. Some are much more likely to act upon instincts than others.

[DarkReign]

...and to put a bow on this, for me, I dont much give a rat's ass who agrees or disagrees with me.

That I spent that 15mins of my downtime writing my story meant only to shed light on the excuse of these particular college grads. That someone who never went to college, and if they had would not have wasted my time on a Poetry, English or Environmental Sciences degree, can do something with their lot in life instead of wax poetic about how it used to be, how things arent fair, how the world has changed.

Because it has changed, for the worse, no doubt. I agree with the article that our generation, mostly, will be the first to have it worse than their parents. I am not contending that notion.

But whining and pointing out the obvious flaws in the preceding generation(s) to somehow "make it ok" that you wasted your life in college and therefore cant do anything with a useless degree seems...well, ignorant.

Poetry degrees are fine for those individuals who have no intention of using the degree for a monetary career. You dont study poetry for money, you write it, which you dont need a degree for, and even then, good ing luck.

I listen to whining adults a lot, after a while, you grow immune to the complaints as valid. Same youve heard your whole life, life isnt fair, it never was and it never will be. To lament that very basic fact into your 20s and beyond seems childish and immature.

[CuckingFunt]

I'm merely pointing out that the instinct is the impetus for those actions - not that rationality isn't used. Rationality and instincts are always at odds with each other.

I'll use your example. Say a person isn't just hungry, they are starving to death. They will act MUCH less rationally than a hungry person, as instincts grow stronger and mute out rationale.

Not sure that's how it works, though. I would imagine that desperate cir stances change the way we rationalize, rather than stopping us from doing it at all. Instinct and self-preservation kick in and change our decision making process, sure, but a decision is still made. There's a point before one steals a loaf of bread, for example, where they decide that stealing food is a rational course of action based on their starvation.

Could be an issue of semantics, though, because I would agree if you'd said that certain instincts get in the way of ethics and morality.

[greyforest]

People are even graduating with science and engineering degrees and cannot find jobs worth a damn, because the economy is the worst it has been since the great depression.

It's not childish and immature to complain about the people who ed up my entire generation's future. It's necessary, as there is injustice. Was there an epidemic of 20-year-old graduates complaining about the economy in 1998? No?

Maybe, just maybe, their situation is different from yours. Maybe you could even find some charts and graphs which explain quite clearly why that is.

[MannyIsGod]

...and to put a bow on this, for me, I dont much give a rat's ass who agrees or disagrees with me.

That I spent that 15mins of my downtime writing my story meant only to shed light on the excuse of these particular college grads. That someone who never went to college, and if they had would not have wasted my time on a Poetry, English or Environmental Sciences degree, can do something with their lot in life instead of wax poetic about how it used to be, how things arent fair, how the world has changed.

Because it has changed, for the worse, no doubt. I agree with the article that our generation, mostly, will be the first to have it worse than their parents. I am not contending that notion.

But whining and pointing out the obvious flaws in the preceding generation(s) to somehow "make it ok" that you wasted your life in college and therefore cant do anything with a useless degree seems...well, ignorant.

Poetry degrees are fine for those individuals who have no intention of using the degree for a monetary career. You dont study poetry for money, you write it, which you dont need a degree for, and even then, good ing luck.

I listen to whining adults a lot, after a while, you grow immune to the complaints as valid. Same youve heard your whole life, life isnt fair, it never was and it never will be. To lament that very basic fact into your 20s and beyond seems childish and immature.

Dude, you seriously missed the point of the article so bad its not even funny. I completely disagree with the point that people are somehow supposed to get over the fact that sucks to begin with, but the article wasn't a 7 page circle jerk saying "woe us" the way you make it out to be. Its such a ridiculous position for you to sit here and tell people who are showing how they've gotten over it, to get over it.

At this point you really should just go back and reread it or just stop commenting out of ignorance. I don't always agree with you DR and I generally like you, but to listen to you whine about others whining (which isn't even whining) is fairly disappointing.

[LnGrrrR]

The prac ioners of FGM certainly don't think that they're acting immorally. In fact, they think quite the opposite. Are they sociopaths?

Would you like to prove that assertion before I take that at face value?

[MannyIsGod]

Like I don't even understand what your point is, DR. Are these people just supposed to ignore what has occurred in their life? You act as if the discussion about how our society is best run and the implications of the actions of prior generations on subsequent generations isn't allowed to happen because you're not getting on with life. The majority of my generation is dealing with the sandwich that the baby boomers laid at our feet because we have no other choice but I fail to understand how addressing the issues at hand and how we got here is somehow wrong or wasteful. On the contrary its downright necessary.

[ElNono]

I'm merely pointing out that the instinct is the impetus for those actions - not that rationality isn't used. Rationality and instincts are always at odds with each other.

I'll use your example. Say a person isn't just hungry, they are starving to death. They will act MUCH less rationally than a hungry person, as instincts grow stronger and mute out rationale.

People are highly variable as to what their threshold is. Some are much more likely to act upon instincts than others.

But that's exactly why I said "Instinctive reactions on humans have, for the most part, been constrained to time sensitive or highly emotional moments."

If you're starving and time is running out on you, that's where you leave reason behind.

As I said earlier, there's definitely exceptions to the rule. But that's far from the norm.

[vy65]

Would you like to prove that assertion before I take that at face value?

I gotta do everything around here.

Cultural, religious and social causes

The causes of female genital mutilation include a mix of cultural, religious and social factors within families and communities.

* Where FGM is a social convention, the social pressure to conform to what others do and have been doing is a strong motivation to perpetuate the practice.
* FGM is often considered a necessary part of raising a girl properly, and a way to prepare her for adulthood and marriage.
* FGM is often motivated by beliefs about what is considered proper sexual behaviour, linking procedures to premarital virginity and marital fidelity. FGM is in many communities believed to reduce a woman's libido, and thereby is further believed to help her resist "illicit" sexual acts. When a vaginal opening is covered or narrowed (type 3 above), the fear of pain of opening it, and the fear that this will be found out, is expected to further discourage "illicit" sexual intercourse among women with this type of FGM.
* FGM is associated with cultural ideals of femininity and modesty, which include the notion that girls are “clean” and "beautiful" after removal of body parts that are considered "male" or "unclean".
* Though no religious scripts prescribe the practice, prac ioners often believe the practice has religious support.
* Religious leaders take varying positions with regard to FGM: some promote it, some consider it irrelevant to religion, and others contribute to its elimination.
* Local structures of power and authority, such as community leaders, religious leaders, cir cisers, and even some medical personnel can contribute to upholding the practice.
* In most societies, FGM is considered a cultural tradition, which is often used as an argument for its continuation.
* In some societies, recent adoption of the practice is linked to copying the traditions of neighbouring groups. Sometimes it has started as part of a wider religious or traditional revival movement.
* In some societies, FGM is being practised by new groups when they move into areas where the local population practice FGM.

[greyforest]

I guess I'm just saying that it's all shades of gray. A hungry person may act more irrationally than someone who is not, and it doesn't have to be out of seeking food. Check this out:

http://www.neatorama.com/2011/04/12/...e-after-lunch/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ing-lunch.html
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/...fter-lunch.ars
http://www.miller-mccune.com/legal-a...r-lunch-30179/

And these are judges, purported to be the most logical and least instinctually driven people of all.

[CuckingFunt]

I guess I'm just saying that it's all shades of gray. A hungry person may act more irrationally than someone who is not, and it doesn't have to be out of seeking food. Check this out:

http://www.neatorama.com/2011/04/12/...e-after-lunch/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ing-lunch.html
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/...fter-lunch.ars
http://www.miller-mccune.com/legal-a...r-lunch-30179/

And these are judges, purported to be the most logical and least instinctually driven people of all.

I think my point is that the above are instances in which hunger has altered their decision making process, not stopped it completely. The idea of "acting irrationally," as you're using it, is not the same thing as ceasing to rationalize.

[greyforest]

I think my point is that the above are instances in which hunger has altered their decision making process

Exactly. This is basically what I was trying to say here, but wasn't clear enough:

Every moment we live is largely governed by instinctive thinking.

Replace "governed" with "altered by". We aren't arguing much other than semantics on this derail.

[ploto]

Was there an epidemic of 20-year-old graduates complaining about the economy in 1998? No?

Try 1982.

[DarrinS]

Like I don't even understand what your point is, DR. Are these people just supposed to ignore what has occurred in their life? You act as if the discussion about how our society is best run and the implications of the actions of prior generations on subsequent generations isn't allowed to happen because you're not getting on with life. The majority of my generation is dealing with the sandwich that the baby boomers laid at our feet because we have no other choice but I fail to understand how addressing the issues at hand and how we got here is somehow wrong or wasteful. On the contrary its downright necessary.

Do you think the economic downturn hurt only your generation? I know a lot of young people are stressing out about their student loans and paying their cell phone bill, but the evil, older generations are worried about losing a giant chunk of their 401k, having a mortgage that is underwater, saving for our own kids' educations, etc. etc. Those of us that have lived through equally ty times (1970's) know "this too shall pass". Camping out in the financial districts of America doesn't seem like the most creative use of time, IMHO.

[DarrinS]

It's not childish and immature to complain about the people who ed up my entire generation's future.

Yes

By the way, SS probably won't be there for you either, so be prepared.

It's necessary, as there is injustice. Was there an epidemic of 20-year-old graduates complaining about the economy in 1998? No?

Late 70's - early 80's.

[greyforest]

Try 1982.

Try 1929.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yes

By the way, SS probably won't be there for you either, so be prepared.



Late 70's - early 80's.

No . I had a wife and new baby and lost my job when the homebuilding industry imploded. Went from a $140,000 a year job to a $30,000 a year job and worked my way back up.

[MannyIsGod]

Do you think the economic downturn hurt only your generation? I know a lot of young people are stressing out about their student loans and paying their cell phone bill, but the evil, older generations are worried about losing a giant chunk of their 401k, having a mortgage that is underwater, saving for our own kids' educations, etc. etc. Those of us that have lived through equally ty times (1970's) know "this too shall pass". Camping out in the financial districts of America doesn't seem like the most creative use of time, IMHO.

YOU the bed. The article was about MY generation and having to deal with the mess YOUR generation made. Frankly, your generation deserves to feel the pain more than any other. The article didn't talk much about camping out in financial districts but rather in how my generation is dealing with the show yours generated.

Yes, things will get better, but had you read the article you might have noticed that it mentioned lasting effects of starting a career at a time like this.

[CuckingFunt]

More than anything else, I think it's the level of defensiveness in this thread that I find so surprising.

[MannyIsGod]

More than anything else, I think it's the level of defensiveness in this thread that I find surprising.

Really? I don't find it surprising at all.

What makes me sad is how few people can't seem to understand what the point of the journalist was even though its right there in the article's le. Somehow many here see this as some kind of pity party through by an en led self centered generation which is so ironic considering the article's contents.

[DarrinS]

YOU the bed. The article was about MY generation and having to deal with the mess YOUR generation made. Frankly, your generation deserves to feel the pain more than any other. The article didn't talk much about camping out in financial districts but rather in how my generation is dealing with the show yours generated.

Yes, things will get better, but had you read the article you might have noticed that it mentioned lasting effects of starting a career at a time like this.

I'm an X-er, not a boomer.

[Borat Sagyidev]

Do you think the economic downturn hurt only your generation? I know a lot of young people are stressing out about their student loans and paying their cell phone bill, but the evil, older generations are worried about losing a giant chunk of their 401k, having a mortgage that is underwater, saving for our own kids' educations, etc. etc. Those of us that have lived through equally ty times (1970's) know "this too shall pass". Camping out in the financial districts of America doesn't seem like the most creative use of time, IMHO.

The ty times of the 70's game, high gas prices slow spending and all. What happened right after it? Back to square one, V8s from GM that fell apart at 40k miles and even more cheap plastic crap made overseas.

That older generation has significant voting power and economic might for quite a while now too. They worry about their 401k, retirement and mortgage, but haven't done much to correct it as long as the same some crumbs along the way. And any blame is usually directed at "them youngins or illegal imimigrants"

The prime people paying for that nice retirement.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm an X-er, not a boomer.

You're an early Xer at best if you were of working age in the early 80s. I understand your reluctance to be grouped with the boomer generation, though.