3 - 26 - 98

Gender Politics

by Willy Chaplin

Waitress #1: "You're not going to believe this, but that man over there hit on me right in front of his wife!"

Waitress #2: "I'm not surprised. Men are animals!"

Noticing that a young man nearby had overheard this exchange, one of the waitresses inquired as to what he thought of this. "Well it would be simpler," he offered, "if we could just hit 'em in the head with a rock and drag 'em off to a cave."

Until the early part of this century, it was taken for granted that men were superior to women and could therefore set the rules for civilized conduct. Since biblical times, women were more or less the property of men, first of their fathers and eventually of their mates. Indeed, the Bible itself rather makes this point rather clearly. Eve, after all, was constructed by God from Adam's rib, hardly an auspicious beginning.

There is some dispute whether civilized societies have always been patriarchal. Some paleo-anthropologists argue that primitive peoples were most likely run by women. Since the reproduction of the species depended upon women being able to both bear and raise the young, it is reasoned that early humans created rules about how the hunting-gathering males would supply women and their dependent children with food. Who better to create these rules than "ruling" women, perhaps by withholding or granting sexual favors to cooperating males? However, since men have been bigger and stronger then women since antiquity, there has always been that hit-'em-in-the-head-with-a-rock thing lurking in the shadows.

In any case, it has generally been assumed that, since humans are a thinking species, that whatever regulations were in place were arrived at through reason, not instinct. That our noble breed has, for millennia, been able to conquer any instincts we might have evolved using deliberation and contemplation. In fact, it wasn't until recently that people were considered to have any instincts at all. It was assumed that our giant brains had obviated the need for such banal devices.

The idea that we are governed much more by the nature of our nurture rather than the nurture of our nature has been all but undisputed. The discovery of evolution by natural selection, and the continuing development of the "soft" sciences...history, anthropology, sociology and psychology...has done little to alter this tendency...until recently. Big brained or not, we seem to be slow learners. To give credit where credit is due, the common folk, as opposed to the intelligentsia who set the agendas, have always been a bit wary of these conclusions. Those who produce have always been more in touch with Nature than those who study those who produce.

Recent discoveries have begun to cast a different light on our nature. Most recently, it has finally been shown that humans have pheromones...chemical substances with no odor that send signals, usually about sex and reproduction...between individual animals. It has long been known that "lower" animals use these substances to signal reproductive cycles. Now you know why that delicious odor coming from the next cubical drives you batty!

But recent history is filled with discoveries and developments that cast doubt on the "nurture" theories of human behavior. Evidence has been uncovered that all modern humans evolved for a single woman in Africa...an Eve rather than an Adam. Differences in brain structure and function have been observed between men and women. Finally, what has always seemed obvious to the casual observer, appears to be true; men and women ARE different!

Does this mean that the trend toward gender equality should somehow be stopped its tracks? No way, José! But, it wouldn't hurt to apply a little common sense now and again. For example, does ANYONE think it is a good idea to house men and women together in the military? Shouldn't it be just a tad more difficult to break the rules against fornication and adultery?

Or why not allow gender-segregated classrooms in high school and college, especially if they are voluntary? Study after study shows that both sexes do better academically under those circumstances. Duh! I wonder why?

Equal amounts of dollars for women's and men's college sports? A truly stupid idea. Equal dollars? Yes, indeedy! For sports? Dumb-dee-dumb-dumb! Why not spend the money on something women would rather do than knock heads? What? Don't ask me, I'm just a dumb cock! Ask your mother.

Finally, consider the fact that, evolutionarily speaking, the reproductive strategy of males and females are now and always have been fundamentally different. This is true for ALL species of animals, not just humans. Some species maximize their chances of survival by producing copious quantities of offspring, like rabbits and rodents. This is probably because so many of them get scarfed up as tasty carnivore snacks before reaching sexual maturity. Others, like humans and other apes, produce few but take very good care of the ones they birth. But, in all species, the males produce far more reproductive cells than the females. To promote his own genes as widely as he can, the male should fertilize as many females as possible...spreading his sperm far and wide. To promote her genes, on the other hand, the female need only make sure that at least one male does the nasty. The fewer the better. Less hassle.

These two optimizing strategies are somewhat at odds in all species, creating a sort of archetypal "battle of the sexes." At heart, all gender problems stem from this simple truth. What more do you need to explain the behavior of one William Jefferson Clinton or, for that matter, the behavior of Hillary Rodham Clinton? All the explanations, rationalizations and excuses boil down to "He's a boy, she's a girl."

Of course, politics, religion and just plain fun keep it from being quite that elementary. Problems DO arise. Each species has its own way of working them out. For better or worse, we have chosen reason. So, young man, no matter what Willy the Wang does, DO NOT HIT ANY FEMALES on the head with a rock and drag them to your cave! It just ain't civilized and it just ain't nice!

See you tomorrow...

Willy Chaplin is a man who calls himself a libertarian and thinks he has something to say to us all. This rant was previously published on How Can You Laugh at a Time Like This?