Re: Ateismo e Fede

Inviato da  Descartes il 25/6/2006 17:27:31

Citazione:

Hai una visione invertita della scienza. Lo studio l'hanno fatto DOPO Hamilton, non prima. Hamilton ha previsto tutte cose che poi si sono puntualmente dimostrate vere, dall'etologia alla psicologia umana fino all'ultimo dei comportamenti degli insetti.

In ogni caso hai una teoria migliore di quella accettata correntemente per spiegare il fenomeno? Mettiamole a confronto e vediamo qual'è quella più predittiva.

Citazione:

Nessun problema? Forse perchè hai letto solo fino al capitolo degli abusi letali. Leggi più sotto, al capitolo degli abusi non letali, dove dice che sono "molto più estesi di quelli di omicidio":


Nonlethal abuse

The evidence for Cinderella effects in nonlethal abuse is much more extensive than that for homicides.
Numerous studies from a diversity of countries indicate that stepparents perpetrate both nonlethal
physical assaults and sexual abuse at much higher rates than genetic parents.
One sort of evidence comes from the case data collected by child protection agencies, in which stepfamily households and stepparent perpetrators are greatly overrepresented relative to their prevalence in the population-at-large (e.g. Creighton 1985; Creighton & Noyes 1989; Craissati & McClurg 1996; Cyr et al. 2002; Daly & Wilson 1985; Gordon 1989; Gordon & Creighton 1988; Klevens et al. 2000; Rodney 1999; Sirles & Franke 1999; Trocmé et al. 2000; Wilson et al. 1980).
Another source of evidence is victimization surveys, from which comparisons can be made between the responses of those who live or formerly lived with stepparents and those raised by genetic parents. The former routinely report much higher rates of both physical and sexual abuse (e.g. Kim & Ko 1990; Russell 1984; Sariola & Uutela 1996). Surveys of runaway youth combine the features of the criterion
case study and the victimization survey, and provide further evidence. When runaway and homeless adolescents are interviewed, a very large proportion report that they have fled stepfamilies in which they were subject to abuse (e.g. Powers et al. 1990; Tyler & Cauce 2002).


Essere un figlio adottato è la cosa peggiore che ti possa capitare, perchè tra tutti i figli quando succede qualcosa sei sempre quello che si prende le botte dai genitori al posto dei tuoi fratelli:


In a study of abusive families in the U.S., for example, only the stepchildren were abused in every one of 10 households containing both stepchildren and children of the current marital union (Lightcap et al. 1982); similarly, in urban Canadian samples, the stepchildren were selectively abused in 9 of 10 such families in one study (Daly & Wilson 1985), and in 19 of 22 in another (Rodney 1999). This tendency for stepchildren to be targeted is especially striking in light of the following additional facts: (1) when child abuse is detected, it is often found that all the children in the home have been victimized, and (2) the abused stepchildren
were almost always the eldest children in the home, whereas the general (albeit slight) tendency in genetic-children-only families was for the youngest to be the most frequent victims (Rodney 1999).


Ma anche nelle interazioni familiari non violente emerge una discriminazione enorme. I genitori giocano meno con i figli adottivi, li prevaricano di più, e sono meno assiduamente seguiti e protetti:


Another sort of evidence comes from anthropological studies using observational sampling methods. In one such study of Trinidadian villagers, Flinn (1988) found that stepfathers spent significantly less time with their children than genetic fathers, and that a significantly higher proportion of their interactions were “agonistic”. In another such study of Hadza hunter-gatherers in Tanzania, Marlowe (1999) reported
that although stepfathers mind their stepchildren in camp, they are unlike genetic fathers in their behaviour towards them; for example, they never play with them. Stepchildren also suffer elevated rates of accidental injury, both lethal and nonlethal, from infancy onwards, apparently because they are less assiduously monitored and protected (e.g. Fergusson et al. 1972; Wadsworth et al. 1985 ), and they suffer elevated mortality in general, not just from assaults (e.g. Hill & Kaplan 1988; Voland 1988).

Non è quindi sorprendente scoprire che i figli adottivi trovano la loro vita familiare più stressante, che scappano di casa più di frequente, che manifestano una crescita fisica ridotta ed un livello elevatissimo di ormone dello stress rispetto ai figli naturali:


In view of all the above, it is no surprise to learn that stepchildren find their home life stressful. Many studies have reported that they leave home at a substantially younger age than children from intact birth families (e.g. Aquilino 1991; Davis & Daly 1997; Kiernan 1992; White & Booth 1985), and not only do they leave earlier, but they are far more likely to cite family conflict as the reason (Kiernan 1992).
The last findings that we will cite are from a study of child health in Dominica: stepchildren exhibit reduced growth (Flinn et al. 1999) and have chronically higher circulating levels of the stress hormone cortisol (Flinn & England 1995; Flinn et al. 1996) than their age mates living with only their genetic parents under similar material circumstances in the same village.


Quindi non mi venire a dire che va tutto bene, e che in 900 mila famiglie non ci sono problemi... vai tu a vivere in una famiglia adottiva, poi me lo saprai dire.