Re: Sociocultural aspects of human sexuality

That's an easy one. People have a natural tendency to continue with the status quo - at least, most of the time - because it works.

Works for who? That is the question. It certainly doesn't work for everyone, not even close. Works for the people in power, that is of course why they keep things the way they are.

That is to say, conservatism is - or at least, has been throughout the great majority of human evolutionary history - a good thing. While traditions are usually not optimal, they have at least stood the test of time - they have worked well enough and not gotten their practitioners all killed.

So is that how you tell if a tradition is good or not, if it stands the test of time? In that case it be bad to change any current tradition as it has, to this point, stood the test of time... but then if you change it that proves it wasn't good?

Actually no, conservativism is not good because it means a lack of progress. If computers never advanced and they stayed the same since they were first invented, that would not be a good thing. Improvement is always needed. Conservatism is bad always, it means something isn't happening. It's a lack of progress in thinking and society. It's a standing still when things should be constantly moving forward.

Of course, too much conservatism is a bad thing - the overly conservative tribe is quickly outmatched by the tribe which allows some innovation - yet too much innovation - too much focus on new, unproven ideas at the expense of old, proven ways, can also lead to disaster. As a result, successful societies are mostly conservative but with some members willing to try new things.

New ideas are never given subsitute for old ideas that worked better. The only time this happens is when those new ideas are good for somebody making the decisions. The decision to pass the patriot act was bad for a lot of people but it does give advantage to the people in power. Most of the "new things" that threaten our existence are not born out of new ideas but old ideas, such as imperialism and established politics.

In short, the 1960s were a time when a great deal of change was needed and a great deal of change happened - but while some of those trends were good (equality for blacks, women, and queers; new technology, greater emphasis on creative thinking in education) other trends were neutral or bad (the "new math", new ideas on teaching reading, certain excesses of the civil rights movement such as affirmative action and forced busing, some economic policies, some excesses of feminism, and polyester clothing). As it happens, one of those excesses of feminism - the idea that all women and children were victims of men - dovetailed nicely with a twisted understanding of traditional religion to produce a very bad effect in which children and most men became the new underclass to be reviled and controlled. Of course, these excesses in turn led to new problems, which I suspect may be in turn overturned soon in a new orgy of creative destruction. I hope that we will have learned from past experience and make this transition a bit easier than the last one - but even so there will probably be at least a few bad ideas mixed with the good, which will eventually lead to a need for more change somewhere down the road.

But all those examples you gave has been good for someone. It does work for some people.

This is why it is important to ask the question: Works for who?

The logic you used to defend conservatism can be used to defend these "new ideas" that you claim are bad. If they're still around, that proves they've stood the test of time thus far. And they do work, for certain people.

That is the nature of things, and while we can wish that people would be smart enough and independent enough to think for themselves the fact is that most can or do not, and society as a whole is generally better off when such people stick to established norms than when they attach themselves to every new cause no matter how nutty. (For example, many people around the world are beginning to notice the problems with the government of the United States, but a good portion of those believe in some pretty crazy conspiracy theories rather than acknowledging that most of the problems are simply due to incompetence or petty corruption.)

Well, you know what would help, if we didn't have a government and mainstream media that lied to us constantly. That might help get rid of some of these "nutty conspiracy theorists."