Female sexuality

[Monkeytrousers]

hello and welcome

Etin: I see what you mean. Rape is rape but there is a difference between a husband not caring what his wife thinks when he decides to have sex with her, and a psychotic who stalks, rapes and kills strangers.

In chatper 1 of Griet's book, 'Science and its problems', Griet is incredibly scathing of the history of inherent misogyny within science. It is, I believe, one of the most comprehensive yet also crucially accessible compendium of the wrongs science has purpetrated upon the female sex. This is not the work of a psydofeminist, you will need to read it to see proof of that.

OBM, Elizabetth, Kittock, Madamez, i can send you the last chapter 'A Metatheory for feminism' and you can all read it yourself. I can also send you the first chapeer - if you pronise to read them through!

And then you will hopefully buty the whole book and read the middle sections

I hope after you have read it Elizabetth, you and I can have a reasoned discussion about this.

If any of you want it email me porlawright at msn dot com

I do not have permission to post it on here though, so don't ask me!

(in 2000) Ellis and Ketelaar..."note, there are now about 19 different grand theories of human nature in psychology, most of them making no precise or testable predictions, generating few lab results, and frequently leading to disputes of opinion rahter than fact. in this respect it is quite ironic that evolutionary psychology, which does meet these prerequisites, is considered by many as being unscientofic."

I think this hold the key to may misunderstadnings people have about ep. Fundamental ones, but which unfortunately, people seem unwilling to let go of.

Monkey
I thought you might say that and do understand why.

Sadly the reason I arsek'd is that I'm v v unlikely to buy a book. it just ain't going to happen this year. And without this reading, I feel I've come to the end of the thread.

So:

See that upright female with opposable thumbs holding a square piece of fabric (which she's waving) while standing on the prow of a disappearing boat, with her head turned back to the shore?

That's me that is.

And just in case anyone wants to take it to the next step the LSE aredoing another course on evolution and human nature - I did it last year; here are teh details;

Dear friends and colleagues, Helena Cronin and I will be running two seminar series on Evolution and Human Nature at LSE next term -- one for Masters students, and another for PhD students and others. I am writing in the hope that you will pass on news of the course to anyone that you think might be interested in attending. The seminars review the contribution that evolutionary theory makes to some of the most fundamental philosophical questions: What is life? How does the mind work? Why sex? What is the nature of morality? And how might an understanding of human nature help to make the world a better place? Topics covered include: modern evolutionary theory, evolutionary psychology, sex and sex differences, cooperation and morality, and evolution and politics. The course will be run as a reading group, with students giving short presentations on the chosen readings. Further details of the courses, including the reading lists, can be found under "Teaching" on the Darwin@LSE webpage: www.lse.ac.uk/collections/darwin/teaching/index.htm The courses are open to students and staff in all disciplines, at LSE and beyond. However, numbers are limited. Anyone wishing to attend should send an email expressing their interest to [email protected] by Friday 30th November 2007. Very best wishes, Oliver Dr Oliver CurryCentre Research AssociateCentre for Philosophy of Natural and Social ScienceLondon School of EconomicsHoughton StreetLondonWC2A 2AE, UKwww.lse.ac.uk/darwin

On a more general note, Elizabetth quoted me as ioFor Elizabetth, the argument apparently boiled down to ?"we're the scientists, you don't know what you are talking about (even though we're not fully aware of what you do say as we haven't read your arguments), you need to listen to us"?

I don?t believe that is what this thread shows. She quote me below as disrespecting feminism; again, I see nothing in any of these quotes but a wish to improve feminism, not for feminism?s sake, but for women?s sake. Feminism is in crisis with women renouncing the term in droves. I think feminism needs to look inward, as well as out, if it ever hopes to change this state of affairs.

?"I think feminism has simply been raging about it for so long now it will feel like a humilation to change the rhetoric or see how much things have changed (ironically helped very much by feminism enabling women to enter the sciences). But the longe it digs it's heels in the longer it risks becoming irrelevent."

"Those type of criticisms just don?t hold sway anymore, and feminism needs to stop mouthing them, putting those words into the mouths of very intelligent women as it disempowers women, feminists and feminism in fact. "

"evolutionary science has been edified by the women in it, women with feminist consciousnesses, but also with the capacity to look beyond ideology if that seems to be hindering female progression rather than helping it"

"Evolutionary theory then provides ultimate explanations for these phenomena."

"I think it is very dangerous and, even more, unconscionable for feminism to take the irrational stand it does with evolutionary theory. To close your eyes to the truth is to turn your back on millions of women who need the help of a biologically and psychologically robust and intellectually sound feminism."

"feminist dogma on rape"

"unfortunatlry shows how unprogressive traditional feminism has become. "?

Elizabetth asks me which particular feminists I take issue with. She does not realised I cannot answer because I do not take issue with any of them. Brownmiller, in fact, and Dworkin, have some views that are corroborated within EP perspectives. But her combative and dichotomous approach leaves her blind to the similarities.