|
To:
letters@guardian.co.uk |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Dear
Polly,
I
could hug you
for your
beautifully
sane and
eloquent
article
warning
against the
nuclear option
in today's
Guardian
("Take
the clean,
green
alternative
over macho
nuclear
rod-waving"),
especially
after reading
so many
articles and
editorials
(even in the
Guardian) in
its favour.
It is
very
interesting
that women are
so much more
opposed to it
than men. The
reason, I'm
sure, is
biological:
men are
programmed to
pursue power
(originally to
secure and
retain as many
females as
possible to
increase their
progeny),
while women
are programmed
to care more
for the young,
including
their
grandchildren.
Instinctively,
they want to
protect their
young from the
risks posed by
nuclear
energy, risks
which men are
inclined to
play down as
they use it in
their own
power
struggles
(social,
political,
military, economic or
whatever).
Your humorous reference to "macho nuclear rod-waving" is a classic example of many a true word being spoken in jest. An anthropological approach to this issue, as to all social and political issues, can be very illuminating. It provides a perspective that may scare you to death initially, but is essential to understanding and coming to grips with the primitive, animal side of human nature, which informs our entire socio-economic order and dominates our behaviour to a far greater extent than anyone seems to realise. Yours sincerely |
|||
