®
Notebook Entries, May 2004

Notebook entry, May 31, 2004

Well, Diana and I put Bettina, her sister, on a train for New York City last night. Diana was devastated; she really believes that she will not see her again and perhaps I also think that way. Diana gave her absolute best effort in attempting to "save" Bettina, but despite her (and my) efforts, Bettina did not respond in the way that we wanted her. In the 270 days that she lived with us, she only found work for ten days. She told us repeatedly that she was doing the best that she could, but her actions spoke louder: We saw that she was staying in the house more and more, and it was the only thing that she "succeeded" at. There is an old saying: Trust Only Movement -- meaning-- observe what a person does, and not what they say as the true judge of an individual's intentions. That rings true in anthropology and in general life.

After leaving the downtown Union station, Diana and I lost ourselves by going to the movies at the new Belmar shopping mall that just opened up in downtown Lakewood. We saw Shrek Two. It was good to laugh -- we both needed it.

Notebook entry, May 21, 2004

After receiving Ms. Vandermassen's reply to reading evolutionary feminism, I quickly decided to remove the principles from the web page that I was creating for it. I realized that such a speculative muse should not be followed by writings and papers presented by others below it. Since Ms. Vandermassen was some what critical of the piece, I did not want her paper presentation to appear as though "it approved" of the principles by merely appearing on the same page. If any one is going to stick there neck out, it's going to be me.

In the meantime, I have been preparing a reference library of books that point toward gender and feminist issues. I hope to have those up and completed by June 5th or June 6th.

Notebook entry, May 20, 2004

I sent an email to Griet Vandermassen concerning the "principles" of evolutionary feminism and posted below is my email and her reply

EvolutionaryFeminist@comcast.net
To: Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be (Griet Vandermassen)
Subject: Principles of evolutionary feminism
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 11:23:15 +0000

Hey Griet.
I hope your paper presentation in Germany went well and that this email finds
you in good spirits.

I have quickly put together, what I consider to be, three principles of
evolutionary feminism. What I do when I compose pieces in a flurry of manic
activity, is to let the words "settle" for a few days or weeks, and then go back
and re-read what I have written. During this time, I also request friends or
colleagues to read the material and ask their trusted opinion.

That is the reason for this email. I want you to read what I have written and
give me your honest opinion. Even though the web page is "live" or activated,
it does not mean what I have written is "written in stone" -- that is the
advantage and disadvantage of web publication.

Please keep in mind that the presentation is meant for a general audience and
not the academic world (but of course, I also desire academic input).

There is no rush on this....please take your time..

http://www.evoyage.com/Evolutionary%20Feminism/WhatisEvoFeminism.htm

Best always, Bill

Notebook entry, May 18, 2004

Last week I finished the first round of attempting to hammer out the "principles" of evolutionary feminism. Here is the first entry:

Evolutionary Feminism: the guiding principles.
(As of May, 2004)
By
William A. Spriggs
May 11, 2004

What is evolutionary feminism?
(Please note: this is written from a male perspective addressing a female audience).
1). Females do not form coalitions to start wars; only males.
The banner principle that underlies evolutionary feminism is the overwhelming evidence that of the 4,000 mammal species on the planet, only two form coalitions to attack their own species. Those two are the (Pan troglodytes) chimpanzees, and (Homo sapiens) humans; in both species, it is only the males that organize and attack. Not once, in recorded history, has the female been noted in this organized social activity (If you can call war a social activity).

This is not an idle boast or minor blip on the radar screen of historical fact; it is monumental in its scope and universal amongst all humans. Are we humans so blind as not to see this obvious fact, or are we now paying attention to the street signs that have always been there but only recently begun to follow? I believe that is the correct answer, because the evolutionary perspective now allows us to see this tragic human conflict we call war in an entirely new light.

Let me give you three names from history -- one from ancient history; one from the immediate past, and one from today -- Ghengis Kahn, Aldof Hitler, Osama Bin Laden. These three males are all evil, are they not? But if we take a jet-bike tour of history and scrape away their names, you are left with the same evolutionary problem that faced your ancestral sisters in the past: There are evil beasts that lurk in the dark forest that are ready to end, not just your life, but the lives of your mate and your children. They are willing to kill you, your children, and your male companions because you all carry the genes of their enemy (Or, so they innately perceive the "other"). If they get past the defenses that you have helped to create with your acceptance and cooperation, and spare your physical life, they have the right to acquire all your resources; and with much deterministic pomposity, could, if they wished, to inseminate you at their will. They may do this because they feel that the female is nothing but a receptacle for their powerful seed; a myth developed and nurtured by males to bolster their deterministic will. If they conquer you and your loved ones -- you are their property, and they "have the right" to do with you as they please, for that also is the social and biological legacy handed down to them through history. For these behavioral mechanisms handed down through history are also tasks given and accepted. These are behaviors that the female has presented to the male as the pressure of procreative selection processes: "In exchange for sexual access that I promise not to share with other males, I want you to help provide for, and at all costs, protect my progeny."

Here is the hard truth that female evolutionary feminists must face: It is your "choice" that has led you down this path. You selected (chosen) the best of the best males; the strongest of the strong males; the bravest of the brave males; the wittiest of the witty males; the funniest of the funny males; the richest of the rich males; the cleverest of the clever males - all to benefit your offspring. And you my dear sister, will do all that you can to learn from the culture and friends to attract one of these "best" males. And guess what? These males are exactly the same despotic males that form coalitions with other males and lurk in the forest ready to destroy you, your mate, and your children. These despotic males, and those that follow them in coalitions, are the best of the best from "the other side" - the "others" In the evolutionary perspective, there is no "us" vs. "them" - it is only "we." It is the evolutionary force that makes you and the male population decides that what has occurred in the past as the best path to successful reproduction. Am I suggesting that the female is equally at fault for the horrors of war, social injustice, and inequalities found in all societies? Yes, I am. Perhaps, that is why I have called this the "hard truth" perspective like economics is known as the "dismal science."

But like the legacy of kings, queens, dukes, squires, and all the aristocracies that have shaped our past histories, populations have rejected and thrown away these social norms because they no longer accept their usefulness. Will we decide as a species that what has occurred in our sexual selection processes in the past as no longer acceptable? Or will your conservative sisters who reside in comfort and privilege decide in small individual ways, "that when push comes to shove," it will be her progeny that has first priority and rejects any change? Will there be a future sisterhood that will learn the benefits of coalitions that males understand and force the future away from the failures of the past? Will there be a future bonded sisterhood that understands that, we, as a species, are all connected by genetics and leads the world out of the darkness into the light of understanding this viewpoint?

2) The female is equally competitive in the reproductive process alongside the human male.

In an important moment in evolutionary feminism comes from the pen of Anne Campbell in her 2002 book, A Mind of Her Own: the evolutionary psychology of women.

"Women have been parodied as the gentle sex in convenient opposition to the belligerent male. Men compete, women do not. Men must compete for sex but what is there for women to compete for?...women must compete for all those requirements that ensure their reproductive success. Competitive reproductive success. When push comes to shove and there is not enough to go around, I am afraid that it must be my progeny, not yours in the next generation. But I will avoid outright violence if I can. Why? Because without me, the chances of my children surviving drop disastrously and offspring survival is the prize that is at stake. Female competition my look different from that of males, but that does not mean that it does not exist. We are competitors - and good ones." P. 310.

Here is why this paragraph is so important: It is my strong opinion, that females, as opposed to males, are so successful at avoiding risk or evoking behavior that leads to violence because of its destructive threat to future progeny that they have evolved higher, more subtle forms of mechanisms to achieve those reproductive successes. And thus, even though it may appear that females are not being competitive, it is from this obvious, yet scientifically ignored observation, that emerges the second principle of evolutionary feminism: That the female is equally competitive in the reproductive process alongside the human male. Some radical feminists may declare at this point that since the female is more "highly evolved," then shouldn't women be "superior?" Yes, my female colleague, you could insist upon that, but I argue that the mental abilities of both genders be considered equal because of the equal amount of genes passed by both parents to the progeny - it's just that one gender had to go through a different "school" to learn these maneuvers; devoid of this higher evolutionary refinement process, the other gender now needs to "catch up" by voluntarily giving up its "successful" domination through implied, or actual violence - a very difficult task, I predict.

I used the phrase scientifically ignored observation as the polite way of stating the truth of why science has never uncovered this obvious fact. Science, along with the rest of the planet has, until just recently, been dominated by the "wisdom" of males, (and acceptance by females of this path), and thus, highly biased toward their own social norms of reality. In the non-scientific world, women, for most of history until the 20th Century, were not even allowed the vote because of "established norms" dictating that females were overwhelmed with emotions that they could not control, and thus, were, non-rationale creatures. The most curious (to me) is the myth of the biological female menstrual cycle putting emotional strain on the female, thus making her incapable of reasonable thought. Or that the prevailing thought in the 18th Century was that the best part of the women was located in the lower regions of her anatomy, compared to the male, who's "nobler" attributes were found in the upper regions of the chest and head. If I may be so bold as to make a prediction: that combined studies of the menstrual cycle, politics, and women's rights may be the "in" subject for female (and males with the courage) graduate students in the 21st Century.

3). Females base reproductive decisions on assessing resources surrounding them at the time of mate selection.

The driving force behind the third principle is, I argue, is based upon the guiding principle of parental investment: "Any investment by a parent in an individual offspring that increased the offspring's chance of surviving at the cost of the parent's ability to invest in other offspring." [Trivers, R.L., (1972), Parental Investment & Sexual Selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), "Sexual Selection & the Descent of Man, 1871 - 1971. Chicago: Aldine.

Once again, we are faced with the "hard truth": If a female must weigh a decision of whom to mate with, her future progeny will heavily weigh on her decision. If a female makes a decision to remain with a mating relationship with a male who is an ogre and beats "his female" occasionally in order to make her "behave," she has made that decision to stay based on future benefits to her progeny and the surrounding opportunities for herself and other females that she has observed in the local environment. If there is "no escape," (other opportunities available to her - women's shelters, etc.) the female will "choose" the lesser of the evils that she faces in her decision making process. If the female has the misfortune to be placed in an environment where resources are limited for the entire population, then most likely the environment will have highly competitive (read here violent) male competition. In which case, she most likely will pick the strongest of the strong as the "best possible choice."

This is where the males have learned the advantages of resource accumulation in attracting females - and the acceptance by females. If males limit the options of the female (take away birth control devices, control the female's earning power, refusing females to vote, etc.) then this lowering of opportunity "choices" greatly advances the male's attraction potential. It is also at this point that sadly, we also must point out that many women turn their backs on their sisters and decide "that's just the way it has always been and will always be in the future". It is up to the evolutionary feminists of the future to broaden these narrow viewpoints and point to brighter paths to be taken.

Notebook entry, May 16, 2004

Here is another email I received about the same time as the one below:
-----Original Message-----
From: Cathy Madsen [mailto:catmad78@bigpond.net.au]
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 1:40 AM
To: wspriggs@evoyage.com
Subject: great stuff

I have come across some of your essays and think they are a great read and a
great help for my assignment. At the end of the essay, you commented that a
part of keeping these essays free would be to buy the book. I just wanted to
let you know that if I had the money, I definitely would buy the book, but
as I am a second year uni student and single mum of two I can't afford too.
Nevertheless, I promise that I will keep an eye on your essays and when I
finish my studies I will put your books on the top of my list to buy and
read.

I just wanted you to know that your work is of great help to people but some
of us can't afford to reward you just yet.!!!

Keep up the great work
Cheers
Cathy

Notebook entry, May 16, 2004

Posted below is an email exhange between myself and a high-school student who wanted an interview:

From: NoMerePen0@aol.com [mailto:NoMerePen0@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 5:22 PM
To: wspriggs@evoyage.com
Subject: Re: Interview
Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my questions.
Where did the idea of Evolutionary Psychology come from? Who though of it?
Generally John Tooby and Leda Cosmides, both with the University of California, Department of Anthropology have been given credit for coining the phrase evolutionary psychology. They run The Center for Evolutionary Psychology http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/. However, many feel that Professor E.O. Wilson of Harvard deserves the bulk of the credit with his book on Sociobiology, published in 1975.
How were status symbols a selection pressure for our ancestors? Why do we feel that they are so important?Status symbols, such as a large houses with swimming pools, or limousines did not exist in the EEA (Era of Evolutionary Adaptation) when our human minds were created some 100,000 years ago. But what did exist was that in each group we lived in, there were hierarchies in which the higher the rank attained brought with it privileges that benefited the children of those individuals. This became particularly more acute after the domestication of plants and animals some 10,000 years ago.
What conditions caused the psychological adaptation that makes us 'follow the crowd?' How does this translate into today's pop culture?
We don’t know the answer yet, but most likely it evolved from following the safe practices of others or a “safety in numbers.” If certain individuals did an act that was different from the social norm, and it proved beneficial (like eating a strange fruit just discovered) then others knew it was “safe” to follow. Today, however it appears to be more a social function of interpersonal relations. A sense of “belonging” or bonding with a particular group of sub-group which may help one’s hierarchy rank within each sub-group.
What possible psychological and physical adaptations can you see humans obtaining in the future?
My crystal ball is not working today. However, physically: possible adaptations in our eyesight over looking at computer screens for endless hours on end. Psychologically: Realizing that of the 4000 mammals on the planet, only two form coalitions to fight to attack their own kind (wars). Humans are one of them, and only the males of both species engage in such activity. The resulting psychology would be how to stop the fighting.
Are we still evolving in a physiological way? Or, now that we have the brain capacaty to actually recognise evolution as evolution, are we only evolving psychologically?
Yes, we are still evolving – but the pace is so slow that humans are impatient with the amount of time it takes to see results. Hence, artificial self-evolution keeps poking its ugly head into our lives (new medications, invitro-fertilization, etc.) At one time in our past (the 1920s and 1930s) there was the Eugenics movements – a movement that wanted “to improve” the human race and rid itself of "imperfect" persons. Seems like a guy over in Germany named Adolph Hitler thought that was a really keen idea. There are of course, many advantages to self-activated evolution, such as the eradication of diseases – that is why we keep trying.
I think that the next adaptation will come as a result of the developed world's mass urbanization. Do you agree with this hypothesis?
You could be correct. The important thing to keep in mind is that population groups all have a self-identity (be it punk rockers, political parties, or nations), and when they rub up against each other, the subject of ranking in the hierarchy comes up again. It boils down to: Who is dominant, and who is submissive. And what methods would be used to maneuver to become the dominant group.
If I was interested in studying Evolutionary Psycology, what classes should I take in high school? Where should I go, and what should I major in when I go to college?
Please trust other with this question, but I assume that chemistry, biology and statistics (if offered) are good bets in high school. As for college and above, go the web site of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, http://www.hbes.com/ On the left side you will see the link for “places to study.” It will offer classes and instructors to contact. Email these people and ask the same question
If you had to describe, in five sentences or less, why Evolutionary Psychology is important to society, what would you say?
It makes the most sense in explaining the truth behind human behavior. Without the truth we are lost as a species.
I found your website very useful and informative, and your theories quite interesting. Thank you again for your time.
- Andrew S

Good luck with your studies, and hope my answers help.
Enjoy the Voyage
Bill Spriggs @ Evolution’s Voyage.

Notebook entry, May 9, 2004

Here are more email exhanges between myself and Ms. Vandermassen:

From: EvolutionaryFeminist@comcast.net
To: "Griet Vandermassen" <Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be>
Subject: Re: your site
Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 16:35:31 +0000

Hello Griet
Just send the paper to evolutionaryfeminist@comcast.net Once again, the
wspriggs@evoyage.com is flooded with spam emails, and this way, I won’t have to
hunt for it. Just start a new email thread -- don't reply to this one.

I’ve made the minor corrections on your paper concerning the Italics -- and
guess what? I have a surprise for you. Just look on the bottom of paper below
your email address.

Interesting information concerning Ms. Blackwell. Yes, two or three paragraphs
on the life and work of Ms. Blackwell will go a long way in developing a nice
introduction into pioneers of evolutionary feminism – I hope some day, including
you!

As I walk for four or five hours everyday, it gives me amble time to think as I
walk. (It is very similar to commuting by auto everyday when a person goes to
work) Since I walk the same route day in and day out, I have time to think of
developing ideas regarding the building of the web section on evolutionary
feminism – or, for that manner, on any subject. The thoughts that I have been
developing in my mind include the “principles” of evolutionary feminism – I’m up
to three right now – the history mentioned above, and recommended readings
(sorry no journals – as the common person has little access to them) in three
categories of difficulty.

As for my support of females and feminism, by some quirk of circumstances, I
have always been surrounded by females and feel very comfortable with them.
Along with my two sisters and mother, we had two female cousins living in our
house because the section of the country where their mother lived (my aunt) was
economically depressed and they wanted a more “exciting” environment that was
close to New York City (about a 50 minutes train trip from our house). Since
all of females were older than I, and were non-college bound (the two cousin’s
mother absolutely refused that her “precious” girls would be “soiled” by
attending college) I, at a very young age, got to observe all these young ladies
go through their mating dances with their future boyfriends and husbands (my
sisters got married, while the cousins remained single).

Despite my close “fellowship” with women, I forced myself to learn all the usual
social skills that required bonding with my fellow males – (and in review of my
young life, I engaged in many of the “manly” bad habits of looking upon women as
sexual objects and “manly” games of “scoring” the ultimate prize of passing my
genes in any method that I could). I must admit, that I love sex with women and
perhaps my “understanding” in my youth, on how a women thinks and acts in
certain circumstances (through observing my sisters and cousins) gave me an
unfair advantage over my fellow male friends in making the females I mated with
“comfortable” by being with me. (By the way, I never discussed my “closeness” to
females with my male friends – because it was not the “manly” thing to do).

But now, at the ripe old age of 58, with a daughter and granddaughter under my
wing, life has taken new directions; including the newly acquired knowledge of
evolutionary psychology. I want to pass on what I know for the next generation
and make the world a better place -- and I can see the obvious answer to “Peace
On Earth” is VERY possible through the knowledge of evolutionary feminism. It is
SO simple – it stuns me!!! (I’ll give you a clue – study up on the bonobos – and
no – it’s not all about the sex). Always, if you read very carefully, you can
“hear” the bitterness that I have deep inside concerning the treatment of the
dominate society shoving me into the “slow learners” classes. I feel that much
of the mechanism were discriminatory – and thus, I relate to radical feminist’s
anger at being considered “marginal” and “useless.”

Thanks for sharing your personal thoughts about yourself to a “complete
stranger.” Yes, your struggles do sound similar to mind. However, I do not
believe that I have ever written about being dyslectic – I think you might have
me confused with someone else – I know for sure that the writing difficulties in
spelling were the greatest hindrance to my early studies. Also I have just been
reading about austistic spectrum disorders, and in particular, one called
Asperger’s syndrome considered being a form of “high-functioning autism.”
Basically, those who fall under this category seem to have poor social skills
and are poor at “getting it” when interacting with others in a group. Here is a
quote from The New York Times of April 29th, 2004: "Unusually sensitive to
light, touch and noise, some shrink from handshakes and hugs. Humor, which so
often depends on tone of voice and familiarity with social customs, can be hard
for them to comprehend. Although many have talents like memory for detail and an
ability to focus intently for long periods, “Aspies” often end up underemployed
and lonely; many others sink into depression, their conditions misdiagnosed, and
they struggle without any help – they often crave social intimacy, and they are
acutely aware of their inability to get it."

It some ways, it sounds very much like me too. Although, I think that I have a
few more social skills then described, I prefer solitude, the company of my
books, and studies over the people I am “forced” to work with (or where I ended
up at).

I will miss these email exchanges during your summer holiday away from school.
I would greatly wish to learn about your experiences at the HBES conference in
Berlin. Is that possible?

From: EvolutionaryFeminist@comcast.net
To: Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be (Griet Vandermassen)
Subject: Victorian culture and science
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 03:01:48 +0000

Just a quick note to say pdf file arrived ok. Looks very cool as a proof.
Also, good luck with your presentation next week.
I also must admit a fascination with the Victorian Era myself.
No need to reply because I know you are busy.
Ill email in a couple of weeks with my preliminary "principles" of evolutionary
feminism...I will want your input.
Best always,
Bill

Notebook entry, May 8, 2004

Here are more of email exchanges between myself and my colleague, Ms. Vandermassen. I have removed some personal information that Ms. Vandermassen has revealed about herself; I feel that it does not involve the science and is no concern of yours. Sorry. I will not do the same for my emails.

From: EvolutionaryFeminist@comcast.net [ Save address ]
To: Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be (Griet Vandermassen)
Subject: Congrats on book publication (two)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:20:11 +0000
Dear Griet

Sorry for the short email earlier, but I really was squeezed for time. Right
now, I am sitting in my delivery truck on the company’s clock and composing this
letter on my portable notebook during my lunch hour. I will then copy and paste
the document within an email “envelope,” and send it out to you – post haste.

What great news to hear about your hard work coming alive in book form!! Of
course you realize that I will have to review it!! (Don’t worry, you’ll get a
good review—compliments of the “Old Evolutionary Feminists Network” and our
alliance building system of “wink, wink, nod, nod.”) What also good news to
hear about your Sexual Selection paper. Yes, it is fine the way it is, and if
you have no objections, I’ll put the “reprinted by permission” blurb and your
email address up front before the abstract. Just give me a few days to “put it
up in lights.” I will put a link on the “front page” of Evolution’s Voyage for
all to see as the first item they look upon on entering the web site.

Also, thank you for the kind words regarding my explorations of evolutionary
feminism. I do know that academics read my web site, as they have told me so at
HBES conferences – but I also know – from the same people, that because it is
not peer reviewed, that they know it has little “punch” and “power.” I knew that
this would happen when I started the web site; but I don’t care -- It is about
the discovery of the truth in my own way, and realizing that I may never live to
see all of my theories bloom into what they could become. Most importantly, I
am having the time of my life and enjoying every minute of the Voyage.

I really miss Jennifer Goehring’s contributions; I have never met her, but have
talked to her on the telephone twice. She introduced herself to me with a
five-page email letter which impressed me so much that I insisted that she write
for me. Her contributions lasted for about two years, and then she disappeared
as mysteriously as she appeared; disconnecting her phone and leaving no
forwarding address.

Do I think that your working title, Debating Feminism and Darwinism? too plain?,
and should it be more “catchy?” Well, perhaps these three suggestions will
help to tweak your imagination.

1). What Science got Wrong in the Debate About Darwin and Feminism
2). The Darwinian Feminist Cover Up: A Call for Feminist to Wave the Banner of
the Evolutionary Perspective.
Of course, the real “attention grabber” would be:
3). Was Darwin a Male Chauvist?:What Science Has Not Told Us.
I hope those help.

As for my move – It will still be in the Denver area, we just don’t know yet.
Have a great week end coming up, and once again, congrats on book!!

Best, Bill

From: EvolutionaryFeminist@comcast.net [ Save address ]
To: Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be (Griet Vandermassen)
Subject: Test run on paper presentation
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 01:39:11 +0000
Hey Griet.
Your up in lights on Evolution's Voyage. Go to the front page of Evolution's
Voyage. www.evoyage.com -- Look it over and see if there are any errors. The
layout is slightly different due to the Hypertext format, but it looks pretty
close to the MicroSoft Doc layout.

Have a great weekend.
Bill

From: Evolutionary Feminist@comcast.net [ Save address ]
To: "Grivet Anadems" <Greenlander@UGent.be>
Subject: Re: Cong rats on book publication (two)
Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 12:13:06 +0000
OK, Grivet, I've made the corrections. Please look it over one more time..but I
think it is as close to the real paper as I can get it. (Oh, by the way, I
would like the full paper reprint).

A few emails ago, I suggested that "you should run with this" regarding the
cover-up of Darwin's male bias....and this paper clearly indicates that you are
already "hot on the trail" of this theme.

Also, this is the first time that I have every heard of the name of Antoinette
Black well -- I'm serious! And I consider myself a fairly well-read individual
on the subject of evolution (at least, better informed than the person in the
street). There is no mention of her in the 4000 years of female scientists on my
web site. Perhaps that summer paper you were thinking about....some background
for Evolution's Voyage??

Yes, the title of you book should reflect the scope of the book -- which I am
sort of in the dark about ...However, in your short paper you value highly the
call for feminists to return to the evolutionary perspective ...I think that
would be a noble quest of the book and should be in the title..

Next email, I will cite Darwin's method of promoting The Origin of the
Species ...perhaps you can borrow some of his ideas ....I consider your upcoming
book an important event in evolution. Question: Can you handle fame?
Best always,
Bill

Notebook entry, May 7, 2004

There is some progress being made in the background of the web site. I am continuing to establish another sub-section called evolutionary feminism by working on the "principles" of this discipline. I believe that this sub-discipline under the umbrella of evolutionary psychology will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming years; part of the rise we come merely because more females are entering schools of higher education then men, and thus, more studies in the sub-discipline. In the meantime, I will continue to post email exchanges between myself and my colleague, Griet Vandermassen in Belgium.

From: Evolutionaryfeminist@comcast.net [ Save address ]
To: Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be (Griet Vandermassen)
Subject: You should run with this
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:16:06 +0000
Dear Griet. I am starting a new email thread because I don't want them to get
too long.

I'm glad that I have "inspired" you to study deeply the citations on this
Darwin's sexual selection "cover up, smooth-over" business. I don't think of it
as inspiration that is motivating you as much as it is the desire for the truth
to be know.

I really think that you should "run with this." You have the credentials and I
don't. My home life is in shambles this summer (it's a very long story about my
wife's unemployed sister living with us for eight months in a 1000 square foot
condominium) and I have to relocate -- sell, and buy a house -- So I can't
really pursue it. And even if I did write something on the website, no one in
academia would take it seriously.

If it is published in peer reviewed publication, the argument must be debated. I
think the feminist movement and my young granddaughter are owned that much.

Hmmmm....why do I have images of you giving a paper at HBES in Texas on the
subject?

Best always
Bill

Notebook Entries, May 2004

From: EvolutionaryFeminist@comcast.net [ Save address ]
To: Griet.Vandermassen@UGent.be (Griet Vandermassen)
Subject: Publication congrats!
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:52:02 +0000
Dear Griet:
Congrats on the book publication!!! This is a very short letter to acknowledge
that I received your email and piece attachment ...I am in the process of
responding with a longer one tomorrow....so stay tuned. I am very rushed and
short of time.
Best, Bill

Notebook entry, May 6, 2004

The sister-in-law problem has been subdued of late because there is now a target date for her return: May 30th, 2004. So basically, here is this 50 year old woman, sitting in the house for the next four weeks because she has a doctor's appointment to go to on May 25th. There is no logic here, and the only conclusion that one can make is that Bettina wants to remain in the confines of the comfortable settings of the house then leave. Diana and I both have concluded that she needs more help than we are capable of giving, yet Bettina insists that she refused to be humiliated by going on welfare. The whole situation has been emotionally draining, and even Diana, despite her guilt over "abandoning" her sister, agrees that she is beyond our help. But true to form, as a "energy vampire," my sister-in-law, will go back East and live with her 78 year old aunt. The same situation that Diana "saved" Bettina from before she insisted that she take a change and come to Denver.

On a lighter note, it appears that we have located a new house to buy. It is not far from here. It is a large house -- over 3000 square feet. It is basically a duplex. Diana and I will live on one side, and her daughter, and our son-in-law will live in the other side. The nice thing about this situation is that when we get old (that is if Diana and I are still together) the kids will move into our larger side and we will move into their's. Hopefully, we can assist each other in life's little travails (or at least, that is the theory). I really like Craig, the son-in-law, as I strongly believe that he will assist me in my video efforts with the web site. The closing is scheduled for June 15th, 2004.

On another note, my kids in California are in deep trouble. It seems that Cingular Telephone is not paying what they owe to the kids for work done. (Over 1.5 million dollars). My daughter feels that the large company is not paying their bills deliberately so that it would force them out of business and then Cingular's subsidiary, Bechtel would move in and then take over their territory. I believe too, and I am not pleased. In fact, I am livid, because it affects the future of my daughter and granddaughter.

Copyright, Evolution's Voyage