I too tread lightly on "feminist" grounds, but...
"We all know men are violent and women helpless in these situations, right?"
Okay - I'll take that bait. I posit that "Men are more or less violent and women a controlling influence on actions to various ends" is more universally true.
Simple example: Witness two high school guys about to "duke it out" over a girl - her response/actions prior to the first blow can't be declared unimportant.
And while we tend to view some cultures as "male dominated" I would further say (hypothetical situation follows) an invader in such a society would probably find less resistance over the long run if his actions increased the level of contentment (and perception of future improvement) among that "non-dominant" sector of society. (Though doing so in an overt manner might have an opposite effect.)
Seems to be off topic, but hard to say how far without the original requester weighing back in...
August 2009 Scientific American has ...
an interesting article, The Mysterious Downfall of the Neandertals, which concludes:
Quote:
As for the last known Neandertals, the ones who lived in Gibraltar’s seaside caves some 28,000 years ago, Finlayson is certain that they did not spend their days competing with moderns, because moderns seem not to have settled there until thousands of years after the Neandertals were gone. The rest of their story, however, remains to be discovered.
So, the demise of this this particular group of Neanderthals cannot be placed at Cro-Magnon feet.
Two 2009 reports dealing with the Neanderthal genome suggest that the capacity for speech goes back to before the Neanderthal-Modern Human split in their "family tree" - here and here:
Quote:
Analysis of the genome reveals that humans and Neandertals share genetic roots stretching back at least 830,000 years. Neandertals, the species Homo neanderthalensis, were humans’ closest relatives, appearing about 300,000 years ago and living in Europe and parts of Asia until going extinct about 30,000 years ago.
Anatomically modern humans, the species known as Homo sapiens, first appeared in Africa about 250,000 to 200,000 years ago.
and
Quote:
Talk like a Neandertal
Neandertals may have had the genetic gift for gab, new research shows.
Analyses of the Neandertal genome reveals that the extinct human relatives had the same version of a gene linked to speech as humans do, says Svante Pääbo of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. Mutations that reduce activity of the gene, called FOXP2, also disable speech in humans.
Humans have a version of FOXP2 that differs by two amino acids from the chimpanzee version of the gene. Neandertals share the version of the gene found in humans, Pääbo reported at the human genetics meeting.
Many other genes may be required for speech but, in humans at least, no other genes have shown such a dramatic effect. The result could mean that Neandertals could speak, Pääbo says.
“From what little we know, there’s no reason they couldn’t talk,” he says.
I'll pass on opposite sex interactions - although it is mentioned in the articles.
Regards to all from the resident biochemist.
Methinks, that both of us ....
in analyzing tactics, are operating beyond our SWC paygrade. :D
Nah. I've known some 'professional' tacticians
who would never do as well as either of you. Tactical acumen is common sense, knowing a little about people, an ability to use the ground (or cityscape...) and do simple math while thinking rapidly and attempting to initiate action instead of responding to it.
On that last item, the US has fallen into considerable disarray due to risk aversion...
War In Human Civilization: This Time It's Personal...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Backwards Observer
Mr. Gat is quite likely a genius,
I do beg your pardon, that should have read Professor Gat.
Professor Gat's Wikipedia entry