FAQs #4 about Evolutionary Feminism

FAQs about Evolutionary Feminism

Q: Are there any core beliefs in evolutionary feminism that are starting to emerge?

Evolutionary feminists believe that the female was primarily responsible for the separation from the primates through sexual selection.

If sexual selection was paramount in the animal world, then evolutionary feminists take the bio-social position that this continues today in 2009. They reject one particular path in Darwin’s sexual selection theory; that “the-male-is-superior-because-he-was-the-hunter”; nature did not change course on a dime when “man” gained patriarchal dominance. But modern EFers also understand that culture has a larger impact on human behavior then does biology; it is a combination of the two, hence, acceptance of some socially constructed social norms which could restrain some biological behavior in mate selection by the female is understood, but also, considered, unacceptable in the long-term timeframe. (in evolutionary time, of course).

That because of their lopsided reproductive responsibilities, the modern female has much greater role in initiating the sexual dance with males then previously thought. Radical evolutionary feminists take the hard feminist position that the mating signals that modern females give off today are so subtle as to make them almost invisible to male study bias. Moderate evolutionary feminist take the stand that because of the cultural influences over the biological in the modern human female, many females ignore their biological "hunches" and follow cultural norms in mating strategies.

That violent conflicts between fractions (be they nations, ethnic or religious groups) will continue until all women are empowered. By empowered, it is meant full educational, social, and biological support. By biological it is meant that no female or male fetus will be aborted prior to birth due to male offspring preferences in the local culture -- a task easy to speak, but difficult to implement.
That among the more than 4,000 species of mammals, only two have been observed to form coalitions that kill their own species -- chimpanzees and humans. Hence, hard-core evolutionary feminists believe that war is not healthy for children of the Earth and that war is a form of dominance control by dominant nations or society that just happen to be in a superior position in the long timeline of evolution.

Radical evolutionary feminists take the position that the female of our species is the superior sex. Moderate EFers tend to think that the sexes are equal in their mating strategies with good natured debate between the two.

Sexual Selection is the academic wording for “Attraction” has morphed into “Romantic Attraction” to the most modern version: Romantic Love.” The last phrases are products of the work of Dr. Helen Fisher, anthropological evolutionist. (See my Essay:….footnotes, 3, 4, & 5. for references).

Like the famous political statement attributed to Jim Carville to then, candidate, Bill Clinton about the core belief of the people's reason to vote: It's the economy stupid." So, too, in evolutionary thought that "It's about the resources, people." Which morphs to the evolutionary feminist's credo: "It's about the children, stupid!"

Radical evolutionary feminists take the position that the female of our species is the superior sex. Moderate EFers tend to think that the sexes are equal in their mating strategies with good natured debate between the two.

Therefore: if sexual selection is the primary driving evolutionary force in human reproduction, then the female’s decision about her body and reproductive choice, is inviolable. Bumper sticker view: pro-choice is inviolable.

Please note: The below was written before September 7th, 2009

A: yes,
That, in the beginning, it was the female, through sexual selection, that changed the direction of our ancestral primates, the chimpanzees, on a path toward a less violent, and thus, more humane behavior. The major core belief is that human female ancestors started the human species through choice.

Instead of natural selection - the hard, evolutionary force that molds the physical developments of mammals - like available sunlight, wind, rain, drought - in other words, the local environment at a particular location on the planet which produced the brutish behavior of the male, the "modern" female decided that the male she would select would have the soft evolutionary forces such as charm, wit in conversation, perceptions, cognition, memories, and social skills - things that are not necessary for "survival of the fittest." This is Darwin's theory of Sexual Selection.

The short version? That Woman Created Man. In other words, it was "female choice" that your female ancestor decided that she no longer wanted to be "man-handled" in the brutish mannerism found in some chimpanzee cultures. This in turn, gives the political belief of "pro-choice" a biological underpinning and gives it greater importance.