I wasn't disputing this. I simply said that it is their "default mode" to not be.

Not, you implied women 'evolved' to be duplicitous. This argument is always evoked by people pushing biological determinism.

Historical records show a huge amount of war...

Yes, I'm sure there are historical records in support of your idea. It doesn't prove anything because you are simply backfitting the data to fit what you have already decided.

In the end, it's a completely pointless and unnecessary argument. All that matters is observing their behavior now and pointing out how this is bad behavior. There is no need to try to tenuously link that behavior to "evolution"; that simply detracts from the main point.

I wasn't disputing this. I simply said that it is their "default mode" to not be. Not, you implied women 'evolved' to be duplicitous. This argument is always evoked by people pushing biological determinism.

Historical records show a huge amount of war...

Yes, I'm sure there are historical records in support of your idea. It doesn't prove anything because you are simply backfitting the data to fit what you have already decided.

In the end, it's a completely pointless and unnecessary argument. All that matters is observing their behavior now and pointing out how this is bad behavior. There is no need to try to tenuously link that behavior to "evolution"; that simply detracts from the main point.

I wasn't disputing this. I simply said that it is their "default mode" to not be. Not, you implied women 'evolved' to be duplicitous. This argument is always evoked by people pushing biological determinism.

Historical records show a huge amount of war...

Yes, I'm sure there are historical records in support of your idea. It doesn't prove anything because you are simply backfitting the data to fit what you have already decided.

In the end, it's a completely pointless and unnecessary argument. All that matters is observing their behavior now and pointing out how this is bad behavior. There is no need to try to tenuously link that behavior to "evolution"; that simply detracts from the main point.

I wasn't disputing this. I simply said that it is their "default mode" to not be. Not, you implied women 'evolved' to be duplicitous. This argument is always evoked by people pushing biological determinism.

Historical records show a huge amount of war Yes, I'm sure there are historical records in support of your idea. It doesn't prove anything because you are simply backfitting the data to fit what you have already decided.

In the end, it's a completely pointless and unnecessary argument. All that matters is observing their behavior now and pointing out how this is bad behavior. There is no need to try to tenuously link that behavior to "evolution"; that simply detracts from the main point.