"Tron" (tronfuru{at}frisurf.no) writes:
> "Avenger"  skrev i melding
> news:MqPWd.44477$ya6.23554{at}trndny01...
>>
>> "Tron"  wrote in message
>> news:7_IWd.875$ai7.17982{at}news2.e.nsc.no...
>>>
>>> "Tink"  skrev i melding
>>> news:1110114633.126823.268520{at}o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>> > Parallel chimps
>>> >
>>> > "We know that one of the most reliable predictors of
increased male
>>> > aggression is the presence of sexually receptive
females," said Jeffrey
>>> > French, a psychobiologist who studies primate behavior at the
>>> > University of Nebraska, Omaha.
>>>
>>> Does this mean that controlling female sexuality (dividing them up
>>> amongst
>>> men so that they are noe longer "liable to receive"
even if receptive)
>>> is a good idea if one wants to enjoy a peaceful and stable society?
>>
>> Well, that's one of the reasons marriage was invented.
>
> Anything else on this, or is it just opinion?
>
>>But females in  general cause trouble and dissension
>
> Yes.
>
>> this is why they were never permitted on navy ships
>
> They were permitted on navy ships.

Not until very recently. In the US, still not on subs.

>> or the military
>
> "The Military"? How about Israel?

Israel is often cited by fools who believe in the *myth* that Isreal
integrates women into combat units. That has not been true, since 1949.
See " Women In The Military; Flirting With Disaster ", by Brian Mitchell.

>>not because they were incapable of firing a  weapon.
>
> I always thought their ability to fire weapons was an essential ingredient
> in their charm.

OK, so you're wrong. No big.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/7/05 12:04:48 AM ---