Re: virus: _____ of Virus

Marie Foster (
Sun, 30 Nov 1997 12:24:21 -0800

Brett Lane Robertson wrote:
> In this case, I am implying that the biological role of woman as mother/wife
> seems to imply that "family" is more properly feminine: And I am assuming
> that government has taken on a protective, nurturing, "familial" role. I am
> not talking about a particular woman or a particular government,
> really...just that organizing individuals into a group with a central
> governing body might have similarities to raising a family.
> Brett
> ps thanks for your interest.

Brett... Family must be mutually advantageous to work. I think this is
the reason that we have so many that fail nowdays. I have my
Grandfather's diary. It is published on my website. He was born just
after the civil war ended. He started the diary as a teenager and much
of it pertains to his desire for family. In fact the diary ends the
night his first wife died.

What I learned from this recent history is that both man and wife were
absolutly needed for survival. And I do not think that we have come so
far yet to not feel the draw of that desire. But what seems to me to be
missing is the mutual respect for each person's role in the family
structure. Also, we need to reevaluate how to set it up so that each
person is needed.

Anyway, so to answer your question... No I do not see government as more
feminine than male. But the reason is that government is a way to
structure many families together for the good of all (and usually for
protection from "the others").

That is where I am at in my reasoning at this time. But I am open to
having my ideas changed.