The Scientific Fundamentalist

In an earlier post, I explain why virtually all stereotypes are empirically true. Stereotypes come from the aggregation and generalization of the daily experiences of millions of people, so they cannot possibly fail to be true. Stereotypes are based on massive empirical data, and empirical data don't lie. However, I also explain that one of the very few stereotypes that are not empirically true is the aphorism "You can't judge a book by its cover." Contrary to popular belief, you can very accurately judge people's character just by looking at them. Read More

In my previous post, I discuss Finkel and Eastwick's forthcoming article in Psychological Science, which demonstrates that the typical and universal sex difference in mate selectivity, where men are much less selective than women, can be reversed by simply changing the institutional arrangement where men approach women. When women approach men, they begin to act more like men, and become just as aggressive and indiscriminant as men are. Sex differences in mate selectivity are a deeply genetically encoded part of male and female human nature. So how could it possibly be reversed by such a simple, temporary changes in the situational arrangement? What does this mean for evolutionary psychology? Read More

Although it is not Susan Pinker’s intention in writing it, reading her excellent book The Sexual Paradox:  Troubled Boys, Gifted Girls and the Real Difference Between the Sexes cannot help but further reinforce my view that modern feminism in the 21st century is simultaneously illogical, unnecessary, and evil. Read More

Once upon a time, before the middle of the 20th century, there were many legal and social restrictions on what women could do.  For example, there were many occupations that women were not legally allowed to hold.  Nor could women vote.  To their credit, feminists of the early 20th century worked very hard to remove these legal and social obstacles to women.   Read More