The comment below was NOT approved for publication on my Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog. Free Clue, TrollDude – quoting Twisty Faster’s most infamous phrase ever is a big giveaway that you really just want to stir up a storm.
However, I thought some dissection of this absurdity might provide some general amusement.
Name: Open Mind 2038
Regarding “Patriarchy Theory”…. Are there any writings, discussions, or critiques of patriarchy theory coming from women who are Ph.D biologists?
When I read about the sexual dimorphism of animals, the sexual displays in the animal kingdom, the different behaviors of the various sexes in the animal kingdom, I start to think that what is “blamed on patriarchy” is more simply credited to evolution and behavior in Kingdom Animalia.
For instance, Bonobos engage in oral sex, or as Twisty Faster puts it, “funk filled bratwurst.” That’s not patriarchy.In lion prides, females do most of the hunting, yet the males eat first. That’s not patriarchy.
Amongst Topi antelopes, the females are in heat one day every six weeks, and they harass the males for sex, to the extent that the males have to fight them off. That’s not patriarchy.
In many species, one sex is smaller than the other. One sex will put on mating dances, and mating displays. That’s not patriarchy.
Owls and other animals put on make up. That’s not patriarchy.
Capuchin monkeys, having been taught how to use money, promptly invent prostitution. That’s not patriarchy.
I am genuinely curious what biologists have to say about patriarchy, and I am curious what patriarchy blamers have to say about biologists.
Thank you.
Ah, don’t we love the smell of evopsych arsehattery in the morning?
S/he could try googling “Feminist Biologist”. That will present a list that includes Donna Harraway, Ann Fausto-Sterling and a host of lesser-known theorists. But you have to be quite intelligent to understand these texts, so I guess there’s no point in recommending them.
I am not an owl, or a lion, or a bonobo, so I don’t feel the need to live by their rules. Is that a good enough succinct answer? Humans are capable of thinking at a high level, and organising, and REORGANISING society until we find something that suits us. At the moment what we have only suits 49% of the population, why the hell should the rest of us sit quietly and say “well the antelopes are happy enough”?
Animals also eat their own shit. ’nuff said.
I’m always amused at people who direct the “feminists ain’t no biologists” critique… aimed directly at women with a tertiary background in biological sciences.
Silly rabbit – it doesn’t count unless it’s a PhD, Lauredhel!
Humans, Antelopes = not the same.
Did this need to be said?
The arguments have more than a whiff of an implication that humans are no longer evolving, too. Which would be a rather terrible misunderstanding, even if much of our evolution now is down to artificial selection of reproductive partners due to social factors outweighing the physical factors that drive natural selection. There’s still evolution happening, and the adaptations that will arise from our current environment are likely to be nothing like those that arose on the savannah of our early anthropoid ancestors.
Capuchin monkeys, having been taught how to use money, promptly invent prostitution.
What else were they going to sell? Op-Ed columns for The Australian?
Zoe: You are awesome.
Indeed. Here Zoe, I award you this internets.
Twisty Faster is a feminist, but not all feminists are Twisty Faster.
Repeat 10 times before bed.
Kirstens last blog post..Things to read.
Elephants have a matriarchy with the bulls kicked out of polite society as soon as they mature. That’s not lesbian seperatism.
Heh. Can I play too.
Male seahorses . That’s not the feminisation of the modern male.
Coral polyps on the GBR reproduce by mass spawning. That’s not an orgy at Club Med.
Oops. “Male seahorses are impregnated by the females.”