Men and women are different, and all fields of study have their own reasoning for the multitude of observable differences between the sexes. Sexuality, as it is linked to reproduction, lies at the heart of Evolutionary Psychology (EP) theorist's explanations for contemporary differences between men and women. According to one theorist, cognative and behavioral differences between men and women relate directly to their biological/physical differences. Sexual attraction is another gendered force which shaped (and continues to impact) human behavior and cognition. These differences generally refer to desires, motivations, and instincts, and not to abilities. Because of this focus on diffrences between genders, and on the importacne of reproduction as a motovation for behavior and cognition, EP has been criticized for being sexist and homophobic.
The following video features an interview with Professor Donald Symons, an anthropologist who is "best known as one of the founders of [EP]". In this interview, Symons discusses his observations of male promiscuity within the gay community of San Francisco in the 1970s, compared to his observations of lesbian- and hetro-sexuality at the same time, and how this relates to the truth value of perceptions of homosexuality.
*Please note that this video contains adult content and may be Not Safe for Work.
Symons concludes that previous psychological opinions of homosexuality - that it is a deviation from normal human sexual preference - are fundamentally incorrect. Using the examples of both homo- and hetro-sexual male promiscuity and pornography, Symons argues that all human males (regardless of sexual orientation) have common attitudes and behaviors towards sex. From this, he concludes that all females also share common sexual behaviors, and he supports this with his observations of lesbian long-term relationship and family building behaviors.
Essentially, he is attempting to debunk the idea that homosexual men are inherently more promiscuous and deviant in their sexual behavior than heterosexual men. He does this by arguing that all men are attracted to a certain type of sex (anonymous, frequent, non-committal, etc), but heterosexual men are not usually able to obtain this type of sex because women are not attracted to it. Additionally, he presents the example of homosexual male pornography and its fundamental similarities to heterosexual male pornography; the exploitative features of pornography for a male audience do not reveal any attitudes about a given gender of sexual partners, rather they reveal the shared nature of all male sexuality.
Perhaps most interestingly, Symons briefly addresses possible criticisms of this way of thinking about human sexuality. In response to the criticism that his argument is an underhanded way of justifying male "insensitivity and promiscuity", Symons points out that an evolutionary understanding of behavior does not necessarily legitimize or justify the behavior, it only explains how the behavior relates to development (which continues to shape psychology). And while he doesn't address the evolutionary source of homosexuality, he provides a strong counterargument to the idea that homosexual behavior is a deviation of normal human sexual behavior, by attributing the differences between homo- and hetro-sexual behavior to the differences between the genders.
(Of course, this idea does not address theories of gender which are non-binary, but that's a whole other criticism.)
So, maybe EP isn't homophobic, but is it sexist?
In an article for American Sexuality Magazine, Martha McCaughy argues that the "watered down" version of EP which is found in popular media allows American men to justify infidelity, promiscuity, and even sexual violence, on the basis of their instincts. Whether awareness of man = caveman causes a man to revel in his "loutishness" or become "self-conscious" and work against his supposed instincts, McCaughy argues that "the popular versions of man-as-caveman never question men's putatively natural shortcomings or innate aggressive heterosexuality".
Another feminist theorist, Sophia Elliot Connell, writes that the theory of EP, and not just its presentation within popular media, is degrading to women and is "the enemy". In her article Feminism and Evolutionary Psychology, Connell argues that it is impossible to ever fully separate ethics and science; she feels that by claiming that oppressive male behaviors are natural, EP theorists are claiming that they are right. Her critisims also address the Western-centric-ness of the majority of EP's evidence, and the lack of response to issues such as homosexuality and sex after menopause.
In an interview, David Buss, Professor at the University of Texas, responds to some common criticisms that EP is sexist. Buss states that the discovery of psychological sex differences is worrying to people, because of the history of psychological claims that the only differences between genders are socialized. He argues that EP has made a number of important discoveries about the differences between men and women - such as the fact that men biologically desire a great variety of sexual partners while women desire monogamy - that may make people uneasy, but are still important to accept "when there is strong scientific evidence". He reiterates the idea that EP has, so far, noted differences of preference, and not of intelligence, ability, or anything else which would relate to an individual's rights.
This is, of course, only a very brief discussion of the issues surrounding gender, sexuality, and EP. Wow, what a tiring and tricky issue!
So, what do you think: Does the belief in differences support inequality? How does/should EP address sexualities which are not motivated by reproduction? Is EP a straight boy's club?
No comments:
Post a Comment