Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id e6S2mvP26839; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:48:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:48:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <F624CxpAOAkK5LqN33H00003b4d@hotmail.com> Errors-To: alcrsb@langate.gsu.edu Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Dana Cooper" <d7cooper@hotmail.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:873] Re: Excerpt from Thursday Notes X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 1068 Lines: 25 RE: Daphne Greenberg's Excerpt from Thursday Notes >Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:46:01 -0400 (EDT) >Attentive Moms May Promote High Intelligence Offspring I wonder if mother rat-baby rat relationships can be linked (related? tied?) to human mother-human baby relationships. I mean, putting aside political correctness, does a human child require a specifically female primary caretaker or just an attentive caretaker? Male rats probably do not tend to their offspring, but some male humans do. Must the attentive human parent be the mother? Before presenting such a theory as a model for human relationships, I would see if that theory held any merit among human relationships. Also, I would find it hard to gauge how much attentiveness is positive and how much becomes smothering. That is another problem comparing rat life to human life. Dana Cooper ESL Teacher-Volunteer Philadelphia, PA USA That is my ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:46:41 EST