We Don’t Want No Bi-O-Logy

The biologists say that taxonomy, that is, how an animal is classified, what other animals it is related to and so forth, is a poor predictor of social behaviour. A species’ mating strategy is much more a function of the ecological niche it occupies, that is, what situation its members are facing. Small wonder that the old-line radical feminists are so opposed to the study of biology. If we once begin to think that behaviour is a rational response to a set of incentives, we may conclude that undesirable behaviour is a rational response to a set of perverse incentives. The next stop is to consider male mating behaviour as a response to incentives presented by females; and what happens then to the contrast of innate male sexual depravity with innate female sexual virtue that is the emotional bedrock of the entire movement?

Posted on March 9, 2013 at 10:27 by Hugo Grinebiter · Permalink
In: TOWARDS AN INTELLIGENT MISOGYNY, The Unmoved Mover

3 Responses

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by The Ghost in the Machine
    on March 9, 2013 at 14:23
    Permalink

    “…the contrast of innate male sexual depravity with innate female sexual virtue that is the emotional bedrock of the entire movement”

    Maybe I missed something, but are there particular early feminist writings where you find this is an a priori assumption?

    What I see, rather, is an attempt to tear female sexuality away from enforced “virtue” — and especially from the madonna-whore complex that is so prevalent in many Western countries.

    In other words, there is a feminist attempt to even the score by legitimising desire and freedom-of-choice for both genders. And in my book this is a positive.

  2. Written by urban
    on March 9, 2013 at 15:04
    Permalink

    You are narrowing the concept of ‘virtue’ to mean ‘chastity’ and nothing more, Ghost. That’s a Christian distortion. Whatever else you want to say about Hugo, he is no Christian. Hugo is using the term in its broader, more inclusive sense, virtue as opposed to depravity, much closer to good versus evil than it is to chaste versus promiscuous.

  3. Written by Hugo Grinebiter
    on March 9, 2013 at 19:34
    Permalink

    Thanks, Urban, I did mean virtue in the Aristotelian rather than the Catholic sense. An example of “sexual virtue” that does not involve chastity, virginity and all that might be how women only do high-minded, nurturing (add other jargon adjectives) interpersonal relationships whereas men only do objectification. Or lust, in the Catholic terminology.

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply