Evolutionary Psychology vs. Feminism

Evolutionary psychology has become something of la mode de jour. It is being used to explain away anything and everything in psychology and sociology. As you might expect with something so new, being applied to areas it can’t possibly hope to explain, the vast majority of the claims made are dubious at best.

However, evolutionary psychology is not at fault. The use of evolutionary psychology is where the problem lies.

Evolutionary psychology is not an exact science and it can never hope to be. Much of it is speculative and the evidence/research is patchy due to it being mega-difficult to gather behavioural data from dead people. That said, it is not inherently worthless or automatically incorrect.

The principal itself is not one that many would find controversial: in the same way natural selection has shaped us physically, it has also shaped us psychologically. Traits best suited to survival have become prevalent (and unknowable, detrimental traits have presumably died out or appear less frequently).  This premise will generally go unopposed when it is applied to topics such as ‘why we find babies cute,’ or ‘why altruism exists,’ or ‘why do we favour short-term thinking.’ No objections. These are things that we are usually quite happy to accept as a product of our evolution.

The main area where evolutionary psychology faces criticism is when it is wheeled in to fight a gender battle. My feminist friends and acquaintances refuse to accept that they are inherently bad at certain tasks, inherently good at others (“But it was a compliment!” doesn’t wash), and their place in society is pre-determined by their neurons. My feminist friends are, of course, completely correct for the following reasons:

1)      No serious evolutionary study claims to have any evidence to support any such grand, clear cut, proclamations. Those that make the claims evidently don’t understand the limitations of the field and/or are extrapolating in a way which suits their agenda.

2)      Evolution hasn’t stopped. We left the Savanna some time ago. To assume ancient origins for all of our behaviour is to ignore our ability to adapt.

3)      The Nature vs. Nurture debate is far from settled. The proportions to which genetics, societal pressures, and learned behaviour influence how we think and act is still very much open for discussion.

4)      Women having one natural skill set and men having another, completely different, skill set isn’t actually beneficial for survival. As has been demonstrated in times of war, women are more than capable of completing the same tasks as men when called upon. Surely such hard times were more the norm when we were running around naked?

5)      The studies are not fool-proof. As already mentioned, the nature of the field makes gathering data very difficult, and arriving at a point where deciding something is inherently human is tricky enough. Then going on to say that something is either male or female is near impossible.

I could go on, but I won’t. The argument does not even need to get to this point. When evolutionary psychology is being used to justify sexist attitudes it means ignoring all other factors in determining what makes an individual tick. We are not slaves to our instincts, nor are our instincts uniformed. It could be argued that violence is an inherently human trait – it appears sufficiently regularly – and yet most civilised people don’t going around hitting everyone that angers them. We are definitely pre-disposed to enjoy shagging, which has a clear evolutionary benefit, and yet we don’t necessarily take every sexual opportunity that presents itself. Even if some traits were more prevalent in women (although there’s no evidence to suggest this is the case) why wouldn’t our gift of rational thought trump that, as it does with other biases?

It is important to remember that we are animals. Acknowledging our roots is an important part of understanding history, religion, and the societies we have created. Evolutionary psychology could eventually be an important tool for understanding our past, but it does not necessarily dictate how we should be living in the present or bare any relevance to how we should proceed in the future.

NB. I am no authority in the field of psychology or neuroscience, just interested. I could be talking shite.