National Review has delivered unto us a puckishly paleoconservative cover story with a very Redditesque headline: “Like a Boss.” Which is perhaps appropriate, in that the story that goes with the headline uses the faux logic of evolutionary psychology (always popular on Reddit) in order to argue that Romney, a true alpha male, should be getting something like 100% of the female vote rather than trailing Obama by ten percent in this rather important demographic.
The article, by Kevin D. Williamson — no, not the Dawson’s Creek dude — starts off terrible:
What do women want? The conventional biological wisdom is that men select mates for fertility, while women select for status — thus the commonness of younger women’s pairing with well-established older men but the rarity of the converse.
And it only gets worse from there.
The Demi Moore–Ashton Kutcher model is an exception — the only 40-year-old woman Jack Nicholson has ever seen naked is Kathy Bates in that horrific hot-tub scene. Age is cruel to women, and subordination is cruel to men.
So, yeah. As Williamson evidently figures it, Romney oozes status, so therefore women should adore him. No, really.
You want off-the-charts status? Check out the curriculum vitae of one Willard M. Romney: $200 million in the bank (and a hell of a lot more if he didn’t give so much away), apex alpha executive, CEO, chairman of the board, governor, bishop, boss of everything he’s ever touched.
Heck, even his sperm is macho:
It is a curious scientific fact … that high-status animals tend to have more male offspring than female offspring, which holds true across many species, from red deer to mink to Homo sap. The offspring of rich families are statistically biased in favor of sons — the children of the general population are 51 percent male and 49 percent female, but the children of the Forbes billionaire list are 60 percent male. Have a gander at that Romney family picture: five sons, zero daughters.
But Obama, meanwhile, has got the sperm of a girly man:
Professor Obama? Two daughters. May as well give the guy a cardigan. And fallopian tubes.
With so much going for him, Williamson wonders, why isn’t Romney doing better with the ladies?
From an evolutionary point of view, Mitt Romney should get 100 percent of the female vote. All of it. He should get Michelle Obama’s vote.
Because all women are inherently golddiggers. It’s SCIENCE!
Given that we are no longer roaming the veldt for the most part, money is a reasonable stand-in for social status. Romney’s net worth is more than that of the last eight U.S. presidents combined. He set up a trust for his grandkids and kicked in about seven times Barack Obama’s net worth, which at $11.8 million is not inconsiderable but probably less than Romney’s tax bill in a good year. If he hadn’t given away so much money to his church, charities, and grandkids, Mitt Romney would have more money than Jay-Z.
He’s big pimpin, yo!
So why aren’t the ladies lining up for him?
Well, Williamson suggests that despite his wealth, Romney doesn’t act as rich as he really is. Indeed, he’s been known to ride coach on airlines! Williamson urges Romney to fully embrace his inner pimp, because “Americans love rich people.”
Still, despite Romney’s failure to live as large as he could, given the amount of money he’s got in the bank, Williamson still thinks he’s pretty darn alpha:
Look at his fat stacks. Look at that mess of sons and grandchildren. Look at a picture of Ann Romney on her wedding day and that cocky smirk on his face. What exactly has Mitt Romney got to be insecure about?
A lot, really. Do you actually follow the news? If Americans – particularly American women — love rich guy alphas so much, there’s not a lot of evidence of this in the current presidential race. Heck, every time Romney acts like the rich person he is — you may recall his comments about his good buddies the NASCAR team owners — he becomes the butt of jokes.
Could it be that people don’t actually act the way that the cavemen and/or animals in evolutionary psychology “just-do stories” do? That, perhaps, those stories are bullshit?
Indeed, Williamson’s story is such an effective rebuttal of evo-psych nonsense, it’s hard not to wonder if National Review has just trolled itself. Or us.
But Obama’s black, and that makes him a “thug” in all the racially coded language that the PUAs/MRAs love to use. >_>
Even if ALL OF THE ABOVE EVOPSYCHBLAHBLAHBLAH were true (which it’s not), women aren’t dating him, women are voting (or not voting) for him. Does this dude think women make all decisions involving men based on how much we want to have his babiez? o_O
Like do women read his articles because he’s so alpha and we want his babiez? XD Do women decide where they shop depending on how alpha the grocer is?
I think I almost threw up a bit in my mouth from reading that guy, is that what the right wing in the states actually believes? I keep convincing myself that nobody can possibly be that hateful and ignorant, but then you get shit like this in the news, and GAH. I’m happy I live in Canada, but at the rate things are going, we’re next on the social conservative chopping block.
I love how Jay-Z is a measure in this lovely article. Mm, your racism is confused.
It’s strange how I manage to vote (here in the UK) and not sleep with my MP. I didn’t realise that voting isn’t dating. Oh well, at least I’m a dual citizen, and I’ve just registered to vote again in the US because of all this nonsense. Republicans make me do paperwork.
From an evolutionary point of view, Mitt Romney should get 100 percent of the female vote. All of it. He should get Michelle Obama’s vote.
Mitt Romney’s gonna grab him up all the black women!!1 Pitchforks!
Ami, we clearly want only MALE babiez – alphas breed male! Who knew! Why isn’t the planet male by now?
I re4ad this earlier on Jezebel and wanted to hurl. That hasn’t changed.
It’s strange how I manage to vote (here in the UK) and not sleep with my MP.
I don’t know if you could’ve gotten away with that in France.
I dunno, I guess maybe the “conventional biological wisdom” isn’t so wise after all?
Yay, you wrote about this! It was too redonk to ignore!
Even if they’re right about selecting mates for status, there’s a difference between selecting mates and selecting a national leader. For one thing, I doubt my national leader will make me dinner when I’m feeling ill or do the laundry.
Bagelsan, hmm, despite being unloving neighbours with France (ref. history), that’s a bit mean. Although I would like their literally laissez-faire attitude towards married women’s sexuality.
Do people with dual citizenship get to vote in both countries? CHEATERS!
I’d rather hit Paul Ryan. Yum. Even though his politics are abhorrent.
And this is why evo psych is total bullshit.
But that goes against the “conventional biological wisdom” that women don’t vote for a particular candidate based on any political acumen women may have that plays a role in their decision-making process, but, rather, that women vote for a particular candidate based upon whether or not they would like to fuck him and have his baybeez.
I was trying to. Unfortunately, if you claim US citizenship you have to pay tax on any income you’ve earnt anywhere, which means I’m liable to be double-taxed, which means my vote against Romney would be extremely ironic in light of his tax returns. I’m not sure what to do.
If women should naturally vote for Romney, just like their men, isn’t that an argument against female suffrage, in a vague sense?
That article seems so confused I’m surprised it got anywhere near publication. Just…weird.
Don’t ever think that some of the denizens of the manosphere have not made that exact argument against female suffrage.
I know it’s bad form to judge a book by its cover, but based on photographs of him and my own experience, his fashion sense and bearing both scream PUA guru/devotee. It’s almost too comical, how well he’d fit into a FastSeduction video.
This crap almost makes me think the rad-fems have a bit of a point. These guys seem to only like women when they’re yes-women Barbie dolls (just look at the women on Fox News) or if they’re brunette, act like dingbats (Palin). And why are they cheering and aplha male if they usually hate them for taking their women?
Personally, I’m sick of people thinking just because something is politically-incorrect means it’s true, smarter and more real. I’m no PC-nazi and there are times when PI might be needed, but it’s the hatefulness, arrogance and their own self-righteousness (in their own way) that annoys me.
Today I learned that “conventional biological wisdom” and the “evolutionary perspective” thinks that women are mindless alpha-jizz-seeking drones.
These words. I do not think they mean what he thinks they mean.
The National Review isn’t a credible publication is it?
There is actually an evolutionary (!!!! eat that, Williamson, you got your own dumb science wrong) explanation as to why “high status” would equal “more male offspring” and it’s not “sheer alphaness”. (In fact the actual sex selection has pretty much nothing to do with the sperm-provider at all; it has to do with maternal condition.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivers%E2%80%93Willard_hypothesis
Women vote for the candidates they want to bone? All is explained!
Wait, that other thing.
Also!
MANLY SPERM: the inevitable conclusion.
http://oglaf.com/son-of-kronar/
NSFW, and check the next few pages too.
The problem here is that Romney is not a possible suitor for these women – he’s a political figure. In a sense, he is an abstract concept. Therefore, and accounting for the fact that women have brains, they will not be swayed by his financial security. A vote is not analogous to sleeping with someone.
However and but, it is true – if Romney could clone himself, he’d be President, and 100 million American men would be Incels.