Categories
a voice for men allegedly false accusations alpha males empathy deficit entitled babies evil wives evil women excusing abuse men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA rape culture reactionary bullshit straw feminists sympathy for murderers why can't men punch women?

“A woman stoned to death is a woman held to adult standards that feminists now reject,” one MGTOW explains.

A woman protests stoning at a demonstration in Berlin
A woman protests stoning at a demonstration in Berlin

In the midst of a mostly dull disquisition on the evils of marriage, filled with odd jargon he’s made up himself, A Voice for Men’s erstwhile cooking columnist 

sexual fidelity (especially in women, to protect fatherhood), durability (to protect women and motherhood), and presumptive consent to sex (to maximize fertility and protect both father/mother from spurious rape allegations).

To put it in less euphemistic terms than Løvenskiolds: both partners agree not to cheat (but men do it with their fingers crossed); there’s little or no divorce; and marital rape isn’t regarded as rape. Which is, I suppose, one way to reduce “spurious rape allegations,” though it makes roughly as much sense as legalizing marital murder to protect married murderers from “spurious murder allegations.”

But that’s not the bit I wanted to tell you about. That was just some background so you could better understand the context in which Løvenskiolds makes his bizarre and revealing little comment. It comes at the end of this paragraph on the disintegration of traditional “andomarriage.” I’ve put it in bold.

With the rise of gynocentrism and leisure culture, the harsh penalties for violating the andromarriage laws began to erode – as our preferences for expanding the purview of women increased we became less willing to hold women to any standards or responsibilities. We now see women as lifelong children: too weak, frail, stupid and mercurial to be trusted with adult responsibility when it comes to adhering to the strict requirements of an andromarriage contract. Western countries now look on places that stone adulterers as barbaric even though we were killing them ourselves not that long ago. A woman stoned to death is a woman held to adult standards that feminists now reject.

Did he just say that “[a] woman stoned to death [for adultery] is a woman held to adult standards that feminists now reject?” Yes, yes he did.

Løvenskiolds also has some, well, interesting Evo Psychy thoughts on domestic violence. You might have to read these next bits a couple of times before it makes any sense at all. I’ve bolded some of the more striking bits.

Strong men were better at fulfilling the obligations of being fathers and women who chose those strong men left more progeny, so men became bigger and stronger over time as their genes spread. This is why women hitting men is still seen as less serious than the reverse: she is testing his strength and endurance in the face of pain to gauge his ongoing suitability as a mating prospect. A man who hits a woman – even defensively hitting her back – is displaying a weak intolerance for self-control in the face of pain and society reviles him regardless of the viciousness of the provocation unless he takes on an impressive amount of damage first.

Men who selected women based on markers for fertility – youth, breasts, hips and swayback –  also were more successful at reproduction. To the dismay of modern feminists, these mate selection preferences still dominate human coupling: women still swoon for strong, successful men and men still have standards for women’s attractiveness. Weirdly, feminists still rigorously enforce the unequal violence standards that disadvantage weak men while they oppose beauty standards that equally disadvantage ugly women.

As far as I can figure it out, he’s suggesting that “unequal violence standards … disadvantage weak men” because weak men have less self-control and are more likely to hit women.

In other words, he seems to be miffed that women might prefer big burly men who don’t hit women to “weak men” who do. And he seems to think that women not wanting to date men who beat them is somehow akin to dudes putting “no fatties” in their personal ads.

Wow. Even after five years of doing this blog, I’m still surprised at the perverse ingenuity of MRA misogyny.

Løvenskiolds claims to be a Man Going His Own Way. I suggest he continue Going His Own Way, as far away from the rest of us as possible.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

102 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
sn0rkmaiden
5 years ago

McLoven talking utter rubbish, as usual.

Completely OT, but has anyone else come across this story in the news:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/child-abuser-in-argentina-has-sentence-reduced-as-judges-rule-sixyearold-victim-was-gay-and-had-been-traumatised-through-earlier-abuse-10261110.html

It’s come to light that in Argentina, two appeal court judges halved the sentence of a convicted child rapist from six years to 38 months. Their reasoning, that because the six year old victim had already been raped by his own father, the child was already ‘depraved’ and therefore in some way party to further abuse, they also considered that the child is gay and was making ‘a precocious choice’. All this happened some time ago, but now it’s recently become public knowledge and there is a petition going round to have the judges impeached.

How can anyone deny the existence of rape culture when a six year old boy is considered partly accountable for his own rape, presumably because the judges considered him ‘damaged goods’?

I don’t know if it’s okay to post petitions here, but here’s the link to it anyway:

https://www.change.org/p/al-p%C3%BAblico-en-general-a-los-ciudadanos-de-la-rep%C3%BAblica-argentina-revocar-la-magistratura-de-los-camaristas-horacio-piombo-y-ram%C3%B3n-sal-llargu%C3%A9s?recruiter=20773159&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=des-lg-share_petition-reason_msg&fb_ref=Default

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

That’s horrible. I wish I could say I’m surprised, but I’m not. Judges in the US do that all the time too.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

Jesus Christ, that story, snorkmaiden… No words.

Spindrift
Spindrift
5 years ago

@sn0rkmaiden

That’s really disturbing.

Petition signed.

CJ
CJ
5 years ago

… holy shit.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

It’s possible the judges are pedophiles themselves.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

What offends me most about the MRA types is that they are not only making absurd demands on 50% of the population, they are also trying to devolve us as a species.

They seem to regard humans as little more than animals, don’t they? I guess that would explain the enormous importance they place on their own sex drives.

They’re so inconsistent about evolution, too. One moment they’re all “Evolution explains everything! Evolution is a sacred natural process that must be slavishly adhered to or bad things will happen!” The next moment, it’s “Oh noes, society has progressed in a direction I don’t like. Change is bad! Adaptation is bad! We need to roll back the clock several thousand years to the starting point!”

That’s why evolution is such a lousy argument for patriarchy (or anything, really). There’s no one set of behaviors that you can point to that are beneficial in all eras and places. The modern world selects for behaviors that are well adapted to modern life. That shouldn’t be a surprise to these guys, being so steeped in evo psych theory, but still they fight it tooth and nail.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

…wow. That story is really, really disturbing.

sunnysombrera
5 years ago

I hate to depress people further (skip this comment if you don’t want to be flipping tables) but that Argentina story reminded me of the Paraguay pregnant 10 year old case. I had a look for updates and as it stands: despite universal pressure, yes they’re still going to hold the mother on charges of “accomplice to rape” and no they’re not going to give the girl an abortion.

http://th08.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2012/233/b/6/twilight_is_table_flipping_mad_by_sketchinetch-d5bx3cf.png

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
5 years ago

Sunnysombrera’s image captures my mood perfectly.

sn0rkmaiden
5 years ago

@Sunnysombrera,

yep, I’m with Twilight over this one. I also saw parallels between the case in Argentina and the one in Paraguy. That poor girl, not only is her life in danger, but she might also lose her mother into the prison system 🙁

Thanks everyone who’s signed the petition, while nothing can be done to lessen that child’s trauma (apparently he was also abandoned by his mother, but the articles don’t state if that was before or after the abuse) maybe making the petition could stop those judges making more rulings like that.

There’s a good article about this in The Daily Kos too, where it’s revealed those judges have got form, they were also soft on a pastor who molested two underage girls:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/19/1385862/-Six-year-old-blamed-for-his-own-rape-in-Argentina

kravkernow
kravkernow
5 years ago

@ David F

Apologies if you’ve already seen this (I’m a bit behind on internet stuff; busy, busy, busy) but you may find it interesting if not.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/20/troll-uses-twitter-adverts-to-urge-trans-people-to-kill-themselves

sunnysombrera
5 years ago

Those judges need to be stripped of their licenses pronto. That poor boy, being betrayed by his guardians like that – yes, authorities are a form of guardian too.

Someone also please fire the doctors/health ministers who say that they’ll do nothing because the girl “isn’t at risk”. Mother fuckers, by the time she starts showing signs of physical problems (and this WILL happen) it’ll be too fucking late to save her from disability or even death. If she dies/suffers permanent injury and they give the step father a lenient sentence…God help me. Mind you if the girl is harmed Paraguay won’t hear the end of it from other countries. The build up has been such that the international backlash would be freaking enormous.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
5 years ago

@sunnysombrera:

Those judges need to be stripped of their licenses pronto.

Yes. Also, their previous decisions should be reviewed, as well as their personal lives for sex abuse of children.

Owen
Owen
5 years ago

I’m not an evolutionary psychologist and I think the conclusions people use it to justify are pretty much all bullshit, but that doesn’t necessarily mean evolutionary psychologists are wrong about what they’re saying. There are observable differences in behavior and learning among non-humans and there’s nothing particularly special about humans that would prevent that from being true for us as well. What is special about us, though, is that we are potentially intelligent enough not to let those differences influence how we let others find their place in society. There could very well be biological bases for our current concepts of masculinity and femininity, but that doesn’t mean we need to pigeonhole anyone into any societal role based on their genitals and chromosomes. The biggest mistake I think MRAs etc. make when bringing up evopsych is thinking that it justifies their bullshit. Conversely, calling it bullshit because you don’t agree with someone else’s interpretation of it makes about as much sense as thinking you’ve bested thousands of climate scientists by pointing out that the earth’s climate has always changed.

Luzbelitx
5 years ago

Re: Argentina & Paraguay

Hi, reporting from Buenos Aires here.

Sadly wwth is right, most judges are this kind of assholes here, and also Aunt Edna is right: some eventually turn out to be abusers (this story is from my hometown).

And yes, all those judges should be removed and publicly shamed, but it’s probably going to take a lot of work.

The Argentine justice system is a realm on its own, a few years ago our Presidenta presented six laws to the congress in order to bring some democracy into it.

Both deputies and senate debated, modified and approved all six.

Then, the Supreme Court ruled all six unconstitutional.

So, you can see it’s a self regulating aristocracy, to say the least.

Many current judges were designated during the last dictatorship, in which around 30.000 Argentinians were kidnapped and murdered and their children stolen -all of it with the help of the judges, the catholic church and many powerful businessmen.

We’re still fighting to remove those judges, so I’m not really really hopeful about these. On the other hands, women’s movements and organizations against sexual violence have been growing and getting stronger in the past decade, so maybe we’re ready to pressure hard enough. It’s yet to be seen.

As for the child in Paraguay, it’s absolutely heartbreaking, and all of Latin America really needs to catch up in protecting the young. The abortion laws allow it in “extreme” circumstances at best, except for Cuba and Uruguay which allow free access (and the death rate for abortions in both countries is 0).

Of course, the catholic church should take its bloodstained claws off our democratic States in order to achieve access to safe abortions in this region. With Francis on top of the Vatican and it’s local allies rejoicing, I somehow doubt it 🙁

Luzbelitx
5 years ago

Damn, I meant its in reference to the vatican.

Luzbelitx
5 years ago

There are observable differences in behavior and learning among non-humans and there’s nothing particularly special about humans that would prevent that from being true for us as well.

Except for… I don’t know… culture?

Bina
Bina
5 years ago

I really don’t see how violence in men is an evolutionary advantage. If violence against women wasn’t a common thing, we would have sex with them more, thus more chances for reproduction. But since we have to be careful about who we’re alone with, there are lots of missed copulation opportunities around the world every day. The evo psych belief that strong (read violent and aggressive) men protect fatherhood and the evo psych belief that men need to spread their seed therefore rape is okay, are incompatible aren’t they?

I don’t think male violence is advantageous, either, unless you have a gross excess of males and they really have to duke it out over the females in order to get one. Even then, it seems wasteful and kind of absurd, especially if she goes off with a third guy who is smart enough not to quarrel over her. But violence against women? Well, yeah, I suppose you could bully a woman into submitting to your sexual advances and so forth. But it’s still unhealthy, because a woman battered during pregnancy and/or denied adequate food (as many abused women are) stands a greater chance of miscarrying or dying in childbirth, or producing a deformed child. From a survival-of-the-fittest viewpoint, it renders half the human race (as well as their offspring) less fit. And from what we’re now learning about epigenetics (which I find absolutely fascinating), intimate partner violence can even be traumatizing and deleterious several generations down the road, thus further eroding their fitness! Not good evolutionary biology there on the part of McLovin & Co.

Bina
Bina
5 years ago

PS: Petition signed. Sharing.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

BRB, moving to Night Vale, where everything makes more sense, and the local radio host has no patience for assholes.

In other news, have a chicken.
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=bLF4NFRpvl8

sunnysombrera
5 years ago

@Lux
To be fair, the current Pope has said some things that show him to be a pretty cool guy, even though he too has shoved his foot in his mouth on occasions. I’m really hoping that he steps up and speaks out. If Paraguay won’t listen to reason and mercy on the grounds of religious dogma, maybe they’ll listen to the Vatican.

Luzbelitx
5 years ago

I agree this pope is sort of cool (compared to the previous ones), but I do think it’s far from taking back all the harm the church did and continues to do to people.

I doubt he would take a stance for abortion, he was a militant anti-abortionist (and anti-gay marriage, for that matter) when bishop of Buenos Aires :/

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Petition signed. Thank you for sharing.

AltoFronto
AltoFronto
5 years ago

Signed the petition. After that and the stoning apologism from Mr Chicken-Fail… I really can’t even with all this bullshit. Are these people evil or just stupid?

Anyway – anyone notice how, according to Mr Burnt Chicken, when a man hits a woman, people are angry at him for “displaying a weak intolerance for self-control”, as in a fault in himself as a person, and not because, y’know, he inflicted pain and suffering on another human being.

“Waah, people are mean about me and pick on me for being a bad person, just because I hit women! Waah, I’m being held to an impossibly high standard for self-control by being expected not to hit women!”

It’s a small distinction, but it seems to illustrate a recurring theme – that these bozos just cannot empathize, or even understand on a basic level that their actions have an impact on other people.

Orion
5 years ago

WWTH,

I really don’t see how violence in men is an evolutionary advantage. If violence against women wasn’t a common thing, we would have sex with them more, thus more chances for reproduction. But since we have to be careful about who we’re alone with, there are lots of missed copulation opportunities around the world every day.

Well, more sex isn’t necessarily better. Pregnancy is dangerous, raising children is expensive, and every new child takes some resources away from the existing children, even if you survive childbirth. If you don’t, then your living children are sepecially screwed. Humans do best with a limited number of children, and seem pretty willing to have enough sex to make that happen.

The evo psych belief that strong (read violent and aggressive) men protect fatherhood and the evo psych belief that men need to spread their seed therefore rape is okay, are incompatible aren’t they?

Not necessarily. As factual claims, they’re compatible. You could reasonably argue that men who rape and cheat would likely have more surviving children than those who don’t; you could also reasonably argue that men who control their wives and jealously protect marriage would leave more surviving children. Both could be true, and then both behaviors would become prevalent through evolution.

It’s the moralizing that maybe become contradictory. It’s definitely easiest to say either that patriarchal marriage is morally good and pre-marital sex, polyamory, and adultery are morally wrong, or that patriarchal marriage is morally wrong and sexual freedom is morally good. It’s difficult to argue that men should or may engage both in virgin-loving, slut-shaming, marriage-fetishizing jealousy AND try to fuck everything that moves, but it can be done. You just have to go for a radical individualism or in which it’s permitted for me to both pursue something good for myself and also try to stop other people from having it, or a “will to power” argument (with apologies to Nietzsche) that it’s in fact good to seek the good for yourself and to snatch it from others.

Olive O'Sudden
Olive O'Sudden
5 years ago

@magnesium,

I reckon that the fat breasts that early human adult females evolved were far less about being attractive to potential mates than simply about having more fat storage to protect against starvation. Women with fat breasts, asses, and thighs were more likely to survive food scarcity long enough to reproduce, so they passed those fat-storing genes to their offspring.

Exiled Star
5 years ago

I can’t believe these wastes of sperm and eggs have conventions. Actual conventions where they pay actual money to listen to actual people like Captain Chickenburner.

roguepixie
roguepixie
5 years ago

Maybe this is too obvious to count as an epiphany, but… you just turn things into the opposite of what they say, and it starts to make sense?

Oh, duh! I feel so relieved now. No more upside-down brain. (Does a small dance.)

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
5 years ago

@Exiled Star:
I don’t think they believe it either, given the responses to Paul Elam’s price announcement.

Ktoryx
Ktoryx
5 years ago

MGTOWs are ridiculous. Go your own way, already, MGTOWs. Enjoy. Go that way and have a good time doing it, and I will weep into my pillow at night over your loss, and we can all STOP HEARING ABOUT YOUR PEEN PROBLEMS.

Except, they don’t really mean what they claim to mean, “I reject this society’s standards for relationships so I am removing myself from them.” Instead, they mean to “go their own way” in the same way a toddler means to “run away from home.” That is, they want to tie a toy into a handkerchief on the end of a stick, stand by the door and say, “SO LONG, MOM! YOU MADE ME CLEAN MY ROOM AND NOW I’M OUTTA HERE! YOU’LL MISS ME WHEN I’M GONE! OOOH, BOY, YOU’LL BE SORRY THEN!” and wait for mom to come, weeping, and prostrate herself in shame.

It never works, MGTOWs. Mom is not fooled. You never get past the end of the block. We wish you would, though.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

Damn it, I can never find that clip from America’s Funniest Home Videos where a boy is telling his mom he’s going to run away, but she informs him that he’s not allowed to cross the street, and he goes “How can I run away if I can’t cross the street?!”

It’s a lot funnier to see it, and I’d love to post it every time we have a MGTOW post.

Because that’s what they sound like.

Nameless Wonder
Nameless Wonder
5 years ago

MGTOWs are ridiculous. Go your own way, already, MGTOWs. Enjoy.

I don’t think they’re capable of it, tbh. At best, male supremacists are flakes. At worst, they are frauds. MGTOW are not actually going their own way, or else they would have done gone by now. MRAs are not actually activists or else they would have been airing their grievances to politicians instead of taking all their anger out on women, LGTBQA, and feminists. Red Pillers are not actually valuing themselves or else they would spend their time pursuing their personal interests and enjoying the people in their life instead of debasing themselves on the Internet. These folks are quite literally the antithesis of what they claim to be. They are practically a self-created parody of themselves.

Some of them claim “I have an IQ of 150 so you should take me seriously!” Right, that’s why they sit around trying to gaslight everyone instead of wagering on the stock market or contributing something useful to society. You know, stuff that actually might NOT be a waste of time (and it doesn’t take an IQ of 150 to see that).

These dudes (and some dudettes) try desperately to present themselves as well put together individuals of worth, but in the end they reek of insecurity and immaturity. They WANT to be seen as smart and capable, but they can’t even deal with other people without resorting to manipulative bullshit. They WANT to be seen as independent and free thinkers, but can’t get through the day without their fellow troll’s encouragement and input. They WANT to be seen as well liked and engage in attention seeking behavior, because at the end of the day they can’t even like themselves. There’s no nice way to say this: they are depressingly co-dependent basket cases with empty lives (and sometimes, just empty heads). They may have legitimate reasons for becoming shitty people, but at the end of the day, I’m not a therapist and I wasn’t put on this earth to take their abuse. So selfish of me, I know. They need to practice what they preach – grow up, pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and take some responsibility as adults.

They think their bullshit macho posturing works, because they’ve pulled it off on other people just as insecure and dim witted as they are. But at the end of the day, the people who DO have their shit together will see right through them which is why they are bound to get nowhere. All they will accomplish is recruiting people just as fucked up as they are, which is what makes them dangerous in groups. Nothing good has ever come from a group of men who are empathetically challenged and honest to god believe people who aren’t like them are nonpersons to be disposed of if they aren’t useful to their agenda. I predict that if they don’t reign in on their violent hate speech, the Southern Poverty Law Center won’t be the only social welfare agency to add them to their watch list.

Owen
Owen
5 years ago

@Luzbelitx

“Except for… I don’t know… culture?”

You’re going to have a hard time finding any psychologists who think behavior is defined by only one set of circumstances (e.g., culture, vs. biology, vs. non-social aspects of the environment). How does the emergence of culture suddenly negate every evolved, innate behavioral tendency? We still produce hormones which can influence our behavior, and men and women produce different levels of different hormones. I hate to have to side with MRAs on anything, but that’s how it is. It’s an observable part of male vs. female development.

A lot of people seem to be divided over accepting evolutionary psychology as a legitimate science because they get caught up in the naturalistic fallacy; i.e., what is natural is also what is good and right and how things should be. That’s where a lot of people who follow this blog seem to agree with the manosphere, and hence reach conclusions based on a combination of their belief in the naturalistic fallacy and their different ideas about what is morally or ethically right.

Science attempts to tells us what is, not whether it is “right” in moral or ethical terms.

sunnysombrera
5 years ago

@Nameless
Slowly slowly, it seems their infamy is growing among mainstream media. From what I’ve read the Guardian seems to have a pretty good idea of who they are and what they do already. At minimum it knows that AVFM tends to harass feminists/women and is definitely not “a supporter of equality between the sexes.”

Luzbelitx
5 years ago

You’re going to have a hard time finding any psychologists who think behavior is defined by only one set of circumstances (e.g., culture, vs. biology, vs. non-social aspects of the environment).

Except that’s not what was being discussed.

In fact, the statement I addressed is absolutely dull in its content:

There are observable differences in behavior and learning among non-humans and there’s nothing particularly special about humans that would prevent that from being true for us as well.

Which is basically saying there are differences in behavior in animals, and we can observe different behaviors in humans. What a shock.

Then you claim there’s nothing in humans that sets our behavior apart from that of animals.

Except for, you know, culture.

This has nothing to do with culture being the “only” anything. Goalpost shifting, anyone?

naturalistic fallacy; i.e., what is natural is also what is good and right and how things should be. That’s where a lot of people who follow this blog seem to agree with the manosphere

Are you trolling? Cause that’s what I’m smelling…

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Wut? Nobody said there aren’t biologically innate behaviors. Speech is one. You don’t have to teach children how to talk, they’ll naturally pick up the language in their culture. Even feral children sort of invent their own primitive forms of speech. Language varies across cultures, but every culture has one.

We’re saying that internet misogynists are wrong in claiming a biological basis for rape, abuse, old men chasing pubescent girls, and capitalism. There’s no evidence of any of it. If a behavior isn’t consistent across all culture and time, it isn’t innate. It’s cultural. If men were hardwired to rape, all men would rape. They don’t. Also, the science is far from settled on how hormones effect behavior. They probably do to an extant, but they don’t keep one from being able to exercise self control. I say this as someone who tends to get bad PMS.

What specific behavior are you claiming is innate, Owen? Say what it is and cite the research or at least a news article about the research. There’s no point in just declaring that the MRAs might be right about something without stating what that is. I have a feeling you’re trying to make excuses for misogynist behavior while avoiding being called out for it. That’s not going to fly here. Please explain what you intend to accomplish here.

Owen
Owen
5 years ago

I suppose I misunderstood your comment about culture. I wasn’t denying that it’s an important factor in human behavior, but even culture can be understood within a biological framework–an evolutionary result of a very social species developing large brains and complex nervous systems.

I’m certainly not trying to make any excuses for misogyny. I tried to be pretty clear that a biological basis for any behavior, whether it’s rape or murder or taking care of your offspring, does not necessarily justify that behavior. Discounting a field of science because people you disagree with have decided otherwise is shortsighted.

I agree that a large part of the misogynist behavior we see is cultural, but that doesn’t also mean that there is not a biological basis behind it. It’s not being biologically hardwired to rape as much as it’s being biologically hardwired to probably be more aggressive, probably be more dominant, and probably have strong sexual urges, combined with living in a culture that is more likely to excuse that kind of behavior. Not all men will rape, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t more likely to rape due to those influences. And that still doesn’t excuse their behavior.

So the science may be “far from settled on how hormones effect behavior.” But even you (weirwoodtreehugger) say that they probably do–this doesn’t result in someone who is guaranteed to exhibit certain behviors, but it provides a framework with which to understand those behaviors. And gaining a better understanding of it can only help us work on fixing the resulting problems.

But again, as I have tried to make very clear, a biological basis for any behavior does not justify that behavior. People wholeheartedly dismissing evolutionary psychology because of the naturalistic fallacy is pretty much the entire reason I commented. You can feel free to address that idea, and please do so if you disagree. But calling me a troll does nothing to further the conversation.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

You’ve provided no evidence that rape has a biological basis though. That’s the problem with evo psych. It’s based on untestable hypotheses. That’s why people are dismissive of it and say it’s not a science. You can’t look around and see male violence and conclude that men are biologically more violent. Maybe they are, but without biological evidence to rule out culture as the main cause, it’s nothing but a guess.

Owen
Owen
5 years ago

Honestly, if your problem with it is that it involves a lot of speculation, I won’t argue with that. I agree, and apparently so do evolutionary psychologists–I read “Why do beautiful people have more daughters?” a few years back, and the authors made it clear in the beginning of the book that their field currently is based on speculation within a certain framework, as well as that readers should be careful not to assume that what is natural is also what is good or correct.

I’m not really worried that I can’t provide a biological basis for rape, because that wasn’t why I commented. I’m a scientist (not a social scientist but my parter is and I think it’s interesting), and what I was concerned with was that people seemed to be trashing evolutionary psychology for reasons that have little or nothing to do with actual science.

It’s one thing to say “evolutionary psychology does not have a strong basis for scientific credibility, so we shouldn’t pay much attention to it.” It’s another thing to look at internet misogynists using EP’s conclusions to justify mistreating women (or anyone else) and then to decide that it must not be a science because you don’t like how someone else used it. Lots of people have tried to misuse evolutionary biology to justify racism, and Nazis used it as part of their eugenics research to further their social agenda–but evolutionary biology is still an extremely robust and productive scientific field.

Lest I get a reputation as an unwavering supporter of evolutionary psychology, I would like to point out that I take EP’s conclusions with a large grain of salt, because like you said, it’s based on lots of untestable hypotheses. All science requires some degree of speculation in order to progress, and perhaps one day EP’s hypotheses will be testable. It won’t grow into a more solid field of study though unless people keep working on it. Even chemistry started out as pretty much utter bullshit, and it is now one of the fundamental tools we use to understand how the world works.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

We mock how misogynists use evo psych because this blog is about mocking misogyny. It’s awfully condescending to assume we’re getting all emotional because MRAs make our lady brains sad and unable to science. A lot of commenters here are educated and have degrees in social and hard sciences. We really don’t need to have basic science mansplained to us.

Owen
Owen
5 years ago

I look at this blog because I enjoy mocking misogyny as much as anyone else here. To be honest though, most of the time I’ve seen evolutionary psychology mentioned on this blog, it has come off to me as mocking the field as well as the misogynists who use it.

I sincerely apologize for coming off as condescending. I’ve come across lots of people who claim to support science, but trash it when someone uses it in ways they don’t like, or decide some part of it isn’t “real science” because they disagree with it…in addition, most people aren’t scientists and I don’t know who on here is or isn’t, which I guess resulted in my mansplanation. I really am sorry about that.

Viscaria
Viscaria
5 years ago

Criticisms of the field of evo psych as it stands today do not have to apply to the Platonic Ideal of evo psych in order to be valid. We can call attention both to the failings of evo psych as a science (lack of falsifiability) and as a practice in the real world (many self-proclaimed evolutionary psychologists go around telling just-so stories justifying modern misogyny and racism and call that science).

Luzbelitx
5 years ago

–this doesn’t result in someone who is guaranteed to exhibit certain behviors, but it provides a framework with which to understand those behaviors.

Fine, say this allows us to “understand” behaviors based on a very-loosely scientific framework.

How is that supposed to resolve the problem of, let’s say, violence against women? How does it help a all?

brooked
5 years ago

I’m a scientist (not a social scientist but my parter is and I think it’s interesting), and what I was concerned with was that people seemed to be trashing evolutionary psychology for reasons that have little or nothing to do with actual science.

OK, I see the problem. If you were in the Social Sciences you’d be too busy be insulted, frustrated, and/or dumbstruck by the manophere’s endless fake theory’s about human behavior, culture and history.

We’re not debating Steven Pinker here, the last MRA “Evo Psychologist” blathered on about random made up theories he had about one million years of human existence. I’d argue his adding roughly 800,000 years to human existence was far from the stupidest thing he said.

These guys know zilch about shit they talk about endlessly. They have no interest in actually learning about any of these subjects because all they want is psuedo-academic claptrap to bolster their “theories” about why women are inferior and/or should fuck them.

“Race Realists” love discussing IQ tests and isn’t because they’re facinated by the various theories about human intelligence; they just want to add a fancy gloss to their “theories” about white superiority.

brooked
5 years ago

*too busy being

I’m on my phone & in a hurry, sorry for any other mistakes.

LBT
LBT
5 years ago

Yes, science does require some speculation to progress… but I want EVIDENCE. TESTS. DATA. That’s what science requires, more than speculation. And I haven’t seen very much of that in the arguments we’re mocking here.

I mean, I can call whatever speculation I pull out of my ass science, but that doesn’t make it so.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
5 years ago

@LBT

Even theoretical physics has math to back it up and it’s theoretical.

That’s comparable, right?

reymohammed
reymohammed
5 years ago

Anthropologist Elaine Morgan floated (pardon the pun) a hypothesis, decades ago, that a lot of our distinctly human traits — fully upright posture, mostly hairless body skin, greater subcutaneous fat, and well-padded mammary glands — evolved when drought periods drove us down to the estuaries to survive. We spent most of our daytime hours wading and clamming. The full, buoyant breasts that women developed were useful when they waded waist deep while nursing babies. I don’t know if I believe it all, but consider: What primate goes to the beach when stressed out? Us. What primate likes to snack on little salty things? Us. What primate has sex mostly during the hours of its sleep cycle? Us. This last only makes sense if we were spending all day someplace where copulation was difficult and therefore engaged in it after we had hauled out for the night.

The extra subcutaneous fat of a woman, by the way, gets quickly converted to breast milk during lactation. And human beings have no estral swellings at ovulation…but they wouldn’t be visible on a woman waste deep in water, would they?