Maximizing female utility

File: 1498040265049s.jpg (7KB, 250x186px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x186px

Maximizing female utility
17th century Europeans venturing in the
Americas faced a harse struggle- settlers
who survived the harsh environment had to
contend with political resentment from Indians- especially regarding land use/ownership.

For a while, Europeans and Indians shared the land, each benefitting from the land in a different way with minimal interferance. Whites grew crops while Indians hunted. Only when Europeans tried to also claim hunting rights did the Indians become violent.

Today, Indians still cause problems- turns out that exclusion did not work.

We face a similar resource problem today, but with women instead of land. The difference is that while land can't choose who owns it, women can.

The problem is the sole claim of ownership towards women- just as in the 1700s, a peaceful existence only existed while resources were used by Europeans/Indians simutaneously. Problems were few, asides from occasional disease transmission.

Considering White/Black mental/physical disparities, either Whites/Blacks may be preferable to women, and at different times, even for different purposes. Considering White/Black disparities, a woman may want a White man for certain purposes, and a Black man for other reasons. And considering women's differing ability to accomdate White/Black performance in different roles, both White/Black have roles to play for women. A peaceful existance is possible so long as resources are used for multiple roles.