Bonobos are good people.

[Fiorina Mina]

From time to time, the uncontrollable urge to write a little sociological essay overtakes me. Here is my latest surrender to said urge:

Bonobos Are Good People

I think if I hadn't already decided to devote my life to being an artist, I'd be a biologist of some sort.

I've been reading a lot about bonobos lately. What is a bonobo, you ask? Our closest living relative. There are three species of chimpanzee: the common chimpanzee, the bonobo, and us (YES, us. Although we are not officially classified with other chimpanzees due to our annoying species-centric egotism, we would be more accurately classified as Pan sapiens instead of Homo sapiens).

The common chimpanzee is the most like us behavior-wise. They're funny, strange, loving, intelligent, ruthlessly violent, patriarchal, and omnivorous. Bonobos, on the other hand, are calm, funny, strange, loving, sexually promiscuous, openly bisexual, peaceful, mostly vegetarian, and matriarchal. They also share more DNA with us; 98% identical to our own. How ironic! Not as much is known about bonobos as the common chimpanzee, mainly because common chimpanzees have been enslaved for amusement and experimentation longer, while bonobos are usually hacked up by machetes for meat (why people don't consider this a form of cannibalism is a mystery to me).

Common chimpanzees are, again, more like us. They make war, they premeditate murder, they aren't as sexually open as the bonobo, they hunt and kill, they eat a lot of meat, and they can communicate using language. I feel a great deal of sympathy for the common chimpanzee, because they really are like us, only quieter. Chimpanzees use sign language in the wild instead of speaking, which leads moronic humans to think they are stupid. In actuality, chimpanzees cannot speak verbally; they have not evolved the physical capability, as this would get them eaten in their jungle habitat- but they are still extremely proficient at using lanuage, such as the chimpanzee Washoe.

Bonobos, on the other hand, do not hunt. Their societies are ruled by the women, and disputes are solved not through violence, but through sexual relations. They also communicate in sign, do not make war, are generally peaceful, and are actually shown to be more intelligent than common chimpanzees. The vast majority of bonobos are bisexual. Indeed, a culture that is highly sexualized has no gender barier, and the male bonobos regularly sleep with other male bonobos, and the female bonobos regularly sleep with other female bonobos. Sex, after all, is tied to bonding feelings, and this helps the society stay closer together.

Bonobos are good people. Most of the time, humans are not good people. I wonder what our society would be like if it were
a) Matriarchal
and
b) Sexually open

Sadly, bonobos are pretty much the only matriarchal ape species. There are no rapes in bonobo society. This is because of the way the society is structured: women on the highest rung of the social laddar, men on the lowest. Rape is a power play, with the rapist exerting their feelings of superiority on the victim. Seeing as, on vast vast vast average, women do not have the mindlessly driven sex impulse of males, they do not rape. Even when they are the dominant ruling class, as in the case with the bonobo. Human women rape, very rarely, but this is probably more out of insanity or sexual abuse as a child, or even revenge for being raped beforehand.

If human society were more like bonobo society, we would probably be a lot happier, all of us, male and female. The men would get their oh-so-desired sex, and the women would get the power (and some sexy times for their own enjoyment, as well), and would not do harmful, horrible things with it like men do. Sure, our species would not be as technologically advanced - seeing as rapid development in technology is a result of men's competitive dominant streak. Or maybe we still could; after all, a lot of lesbians like being competitive, but without the violent side-effects xp

-------------------------------------

Incidentally, I have never had sex, and do not plan too, as I've never been a sexual person myself. I still think open sexuality would be better for society as a whole, however. Just as long as I don't have to take part in it wink

I have put this up on other places, and it's amazing how fast the misogynistic comments start flying eek So I'd like, perhaps, a more intelligent dissection of my thoughts, puh-leez. mrgreen I should state, for the record, that I am only eighteen as of present, so as to state my "ignorance of life" upfront rolleyes

[Queen Of Wonderland]

Damn, I wish I could offer a better reply to this. For a number of reasons, I can't - but I'll abuse my right to reply anyway.

I'd like to see what all human society would be like if it were matriarchal and sexually open.
It might take a fair while of resocialisation over generations to cultivate a society of humans following bonobo patterns, but it can't be impossible.
My heart disagrees with being so open about my sexuality, and being dominant over males. Of course, that's got a lot to owe to the society I was born into. If I were raised differently, in a different environment, there's a very good chance I'd feel differently.

I can't order my thoughts any better than that. I think I'll wait for more replies then try again. xd

[que espanto]

You gave some good points, but I have to disagree with certain gender stereotypes you presented.

While it is true that women don't generally rape, I wouldn't call it "a moment of insanity" when the instance does occur. In that sense, every time a man rapes, it would be due to insanity (men have higher sexual urges, but they are capable of controlling them).

Females can also be as competitive as men. The reason men appear to be more competitive is due to the position of women in society -- women have been suppressed and kept "gentler" than men. To say that a matriarchal society would be less technologically advanced is to downplay the intelligence of the woman, thus giving superiority to the man.

Open sexuality would be disadvantageous before being advantageous. With the way religion and general ignorance has shaped the view of gender and gender roles, bisexuality and homosexuality would be hard to accept. Sexuality is also not a choice -- hence, sexual openness might just result in promiscuity and lack of control in terms of disease and population, seeing as how the majority of the population is heterosexual. Sexual acceptance would be a better term.

A perfect society would be one where the sexes are both equal, not where the woman is above the man, or the man is above the woman. How that would work is beyond me -- perfection will never be reached.

[Fiorina Mina]

i stole your pants

Females can also be as competitive as men.

Sometimes I agree. Hence the lesbian joke.

i stole your pants

The reason men appear to be more competitive is due to the position of women in society -- women have been suppressed and kept "gentler" than men.

But why have women been suppressed for the entire history of our species? Because of men's dominant streak. Saying women are just as competitive as men is an unfounded statement, because if women were, I doubt they would allow themselves to be dominated for 2 million years.

i stole your pants

To say that a matriarchal society would be less technologically advanced is to downplay the intelligence of the woman, thus giving superiority to the man.

Since when is rapid technological development the only sign of intelligence?

i stole your pants

A perfect society would be one awhere the sexes re both equal, not where the woman is above the man, or the man is above the woman. How that would work is beyond me -- perfection will never be reached.

You are correct - a society where both sexes are equal would be perfection, but you are also right in that such perfection can never be achieved.

Thank you for replying biggrin

[Fiorina Mina]

Queen Of Wonderland

I can't order my thoughts any better than that. I think I'll wait for more replies then try again. xd

Hee hee, thanks for replying xp

[aisebon]

neutral

Your entire argument is based on gender stereotypes and opinions. Moronic and subjective in and of itself. Why do you feel the need to perpetuate gender roles?

And how is the bonobo- an animal of lesser intelligence and practicality- an ideal state of being for us? We're different species, and can't fit into whatever equilibrium the bonobos may or may not have found.

[Fiorina Mina]

aisebon

Your entire argument is based on gender stereotypes and opinions. Moronic and subjective in and of itself. Why do you feel the need to perpetuate gender roles?

Why do you feel the need to deny the glaringly obvious fact that men and women act in fundamentally different ways from each other? I am not perpetuating gender roles, which are societal boundaries. I am discussing the natural differences between men and women. Simply saying "We are all the same" is an idiotic disregard of the easily observable.

aisebon

And how is the bonobo- an animal of lesser intelligence and practicality- an ideal state of being for us? We're different species, and can't fit into whatever equilibrium the bonobos may or may not have found.

Your entire argument is based on species stereotypes and opinions. Moronic and subjective in and of itself. Why do you feel the need to perpetuate human-centric self-aggrandizement?

[que espanto]

But the fact is this: if given the chance, women can be as, or even more, competitive than men.

Women give birth and are better equipped to take care of the children -- because of this, men gave themselves the task of being the providers. Thus the sexes developed with different sets of minds, but that doesn't mean one is above the other. Every woman has the ability to compete, as does every man. Not every woman will compete and not every man will compete.

When a chimp sticks a plant stem into an ant pile and picks up food, it's called tool-making. It's considered a higher level of reasoning -- this is restricted to males?

[Fiorina Mina]

i stole your pants

When a chimp sticks a plant stem into an ant pile and picks up food, it's called tool-making. It's considered a higher level of reasoning -- this is restricted to males?

No. But then the motivation for sticking the plant stem into an ant pile is hunger. If women do not have the competitive dominant streak of men, would they bother applying 'higher levels of reasoning' inventing new sports cars? Competitiveness that results in extraneous technology requires a motivational drive.

[que espanto]

In saying that, you're assuming women don't have the motivation of personal gain through the production of materials that will appeal to the masses? Most women nowadays have been liberated from the tedium of childcare and domesticity; as such, they go out to earn money, educate themselves, compete with the men, etc.

If you want to reinstate that women have no dominant competitive streak, then it must be argued that they were conditioned to be submissive by men. If women are put on the same level as men, wouldn't they develop such a streak through time?

[Fiorina Mina]

i stole your pants

If you want to reinstate that women have no dominant competitive streak, then it must be argued that they were conditioned to be submissive by men. If women are put on the same level as men, wouldn't they develop such a streak through time?

Perhaps. That would depend on whether they could muster the level of aggression to compete with the more testosterone-addled males. However, women can never be put on the same level, because men cannot fathom the idea of women being equal to them, which subverts their superiority complex and their desire for sexual dominance.

Once again, thank you for actual intelligent debate. 3nodding

[que espanto]

Us women will never have the upper hand? Ah, it is true that males are power freaks.

You're welcome, but I must thank you as well for such insight :]

[Rao the Zen Android]

Fiorina Mina

i stole your pants

If you want to reinstate that women have no dominant competitive streak, then it must be argued that they were conditioned to be submissive by men. If women are put on the same level as men, wouldn't they develop such a streak through time?

Perhaps. That would depend on whether they could muster the level of aggression to compete with the more testosterone-addled males. However, women can never be put on the same level, because men cannot fathom the idea of women being equal to them, which subverts their superiority complex and their desire for sexual dominance.

Once again, thank you for actual intelligent debate. 3nodding

So where do we factor in your passive-aggresive parade of superiroity complex and domianace being shown in this post you giant ******** hypocrite?

Also the New Yorker ran an article on Bonobos recently that basically refuted this entire "PEACEFUL ANIMALS" bullshit thing.
Educate yourself you sexist moron.

[que espanto]

Quote:

So where do we factor in your passive-aggresive parade of superiroity complex and domianace being shown in this post you giant ******** hypocrite?

Also the New Yorker ran an article on Bonobos recently that basically refuted this entire "PEACEFUL ANIMALS" bullshit thing.
Educate yourself you sexist moron.

Ooh, such animosity...

She believes women have different behavioral patterns than men -- whether she's correct or not, she's not basing her beliefs on sexist ideologies. They might come off as such, but I doubt she believes women to be the inferior sex.

[Rao the Zen Android]

i stole your pants

Quote:

So where do we factor in your passive-aggresive parade of superiroity complex and domianace being shown in this post you giant ******** hypocrite?

Also the New Yorker ran an article on Bonobos recently that basically refuted this entire "PEACEFUL ANIMALS" bullshit thing.
Educate yourself you sexist moron.

Ooh, such animosity...

She believes women have different behavioral patterns than men -- whether she's correct or not, she's not basing her beliefs on sexist ideologies. They might come off as such, but I doubt she believes women to be the inferior sex.

Women?
I'm saying her gallons of "men bad" "root of all evil = men" is a superiority complex over men.