Any explanation of pink preference that is handed to children by the society they live in and only looks at the last hundred years, and calls itself “evolutionary psychology”, is blatantly misunderstanding both words in its title.
[Evolutionary psychology hardly covers] the evolution of morality, the evolution of politics, of cuture, of the artistic sense, etc … There is instead an obsessive focus on gender roles.
Every few months I read about some turds dropped by this evolutionary psychologist and his penchant for spectacularly prejudiced Just So stories. This week he let us know that he’s absolutely sure that the whole world agrees with him that black women are “objectively” uglier than other women.
Like all good evolutionary psychologists who focus on gender, Don hasn’t bothered to talk to any actual *whispers* women. Especially not to any women who write and/or study this, erm, *whispers* smut. Because women can’t define their own experience, can’t tell their own stories, can’t have any useful insights into their own motivations. Because women’s fan academia doesn’t really exist in any meaningful sense, not until chest-beaters come along and put their stamp of Knowledge onto it. Because women’s culture is there to be picked apart with tweezers and analysed with a touch of distanced fascination, a modicum of distaste, and a whopping serve of wilful ignorance. For lo, he has Teh Magick Testicles of Perspicacity. Here, let him show you them.
Via glandujakiss and sqbr. You don’t even have to know anything about slash to get a few giggles and more than a few eyerolls out of this interview with evolutionary psychologist Don Symons, author of Warrior Lovers: Erotic Fiction, Evolution… Read More ›
This Shakesville thread, “For the Discerning Gentleman: You, Too, Can Decorate Your Life With Disembodied Boobs “ has been a laff riot. The thread devolved into a circle with several men at the centre, the men shouting about how they… Read More ›