Biology is Still Destiny

Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature by Murray N. Rothbard

Women are another recently discovered “oppressed class,” and the fact that political delegates have habitually been far more than 50 percent male is now held to be an evident sign of their oppression. Delegates to political conventions come from the ranks of party activists, and since women have not been nearly as politically active as men, their numbers have understandably been low. But, faced with this argument, the widening forces of “women’s liberation” in America again revert to the talismanic argument about “brainwashing” by our “culture.” For the women’s liberationists can hardly deny the fact that every culture and civilization in history, from the simplest to the most complex, has been dominated by males. (In desperation, the liberationists have lately been countering with fantasies about the mighty Amazonian empire.) Their reply, once again, is that from time immemorial a male-dominated culture has brainwashed oppressed females to confine themselves to nurture, home, and the domestic hearth. The task of the liberationists is to effect a revolution in the female condition by sheer will, by the “raising of consciousness.” If most women continue to cleave to domestic concerns, this only reveals the “false consciousness” that must be extirpated.

Of course, one neglected reply is that if, indeed, men have succeeded in dominating every culture, then this in itself is a demonstration of male “superiority”; for if all genders are equal, how is it that male domination emerged in every case? But apart from this question, biology itself is being angrily denied and cast aside. The cry is that there are no, can be no, must be no biological differences between the sexes; all historical or current differences must be due to cultural brainwashing. In his brilliant refutation of the women’s liberationist Kate Millett, Irving Howe outlines several important biological differences between the sexes, differences important enough to have lasting social effects. They are: (1) “the distinctive female experience of maternity” including what the anthropologist Malinowski calls an “intimate and integral connection with the child . . . associated with physiological effects and strong emotions”; (2) “the hormonic components of our bodies as these vary not only between the sexes but at different ages within the sexes”; (3) “the varying possibilities for work created by varying amounts of musculature and physical controls”; and (4) “the psychological consequences of different sexual postures and possibilities,” in particular the “fundamental distinction between the active and passive sexual roles” as biologically determined in men and women respectively. 8

Howe goes on to cite the admission by Dr. Eleanor Maccoby in her study of female intelligence “that it is quite possible that there are genetic factors that differentiate the two sexes and bear upon their intellectual performance…. For example, there is good reason to believe that boys are innately more aggressive than girls – and I mean aggressive in the broader sense, not just as it implies fighting, but as it implies dominance and initiative as well – and if this quality is one which underlies the later growth of analytic thinking, then boys have an advantage which girls…will find difficult to overcome.” Dr. Maccoby adds that “if you try to divide child training among males and females, we might find out that females need to do it and males don’t.” 9

The sociologist Arnold W. Green points to the repeated emergence of what the egalitarians denounce as “stereotyped sex roles” even in communities originally dedicated to absolute equality. Thus, he cites the record of the Israeli kibbutzim:

The phenomenon is worldwide: women are concentrated in fields which require, singly or in combination, housewifely skills, patience and routine, manual dexterity, sex appeal, contact with children. The generalization holds for the Israeli kibbutz, with its established ideal of sexual equality. A “regression” to a separation of “women’s work” from “men’s work” occurred in the division of labor, to a state of affairs which parallels that elsewhere. The kibbutz is dominated by males and traditional male attitudes, on balance to the content of both sexes.10

Irving Howe unerringly perceives that at the root of the women’s liberation movement is resentment against the very existence of women as a distinctive entity:

For what seems to trouble Miss Millett isn’t merely the injustices women have suffered or the discriminations to which they continue to be subject. What troubles her most of all…is the sheer existence of women. Miss Millett dislikes the psychobiological distinctiveness of women, and she will go no further than to recognize – what choice is there, alas? – the inescapable differences of anatomy. She hates the perverse refusal of most women to recognize the magnitude of their humiliation, the shameful dependence they show in regard to (not very independent) men, the maddening pleasures they even take in cooking dinners for the “master group” and wiping the noses of their snotty brats. Raging against the notion that such roles and attitudes are biologically determined, since the very thought of the biological seems to her a way of forever reducing women to subordinate status, she nevertheless attributes to “culture” so staggering a range of customs, outrages, and evils that this culture comes to seem a force more immovable and ominous than biology itself.11

In a perceptive critique of the women’s liberation movement, Joan Didion perceives its root to be a rebellion not only against biology but also against the “very organization of nature” itself:

If the necessity for conventional reproduction of the species seemed unfair to women, then let us transcend, via technology, “the very organization of nature,” the oppression, as Shulamith Firestone saw it, “that goes back through recorded history to the animal kingdom itself.” I accept the Universe, Margaret Fuller had finally allowed: Shulamith Firestone did not.12

To which one is tempted to paraphrase Carlyle’s admonition: “Egad, madam, you’d better.”

Advertisements

12 Responses to “Biology is Still Destiny”

  1. Mr Zopo Says:

    Feminists can hide the truth, but they can’t change reality. Biology isn’t a social construct as they think, they actually believe that some evil patriarch put these maternal instincts in women. Feministas look like children playing amazons.

  2. Mr Zopo Says:

    Feminists can hide the truth, but they can’t change reality. Biology isn’t a social construct as they think, they actually believe that some evil patriarch put these maternal instincts in women. Feministas look like children playing amazons.

  3. Mr Zopo Says:

    Feminists can hide the truth, but they can’t change reality. Biology isn’t a social construct as they think, they actually believe that some evil patriarch put these maternal instincts in women. Feministas look like children playing amazons.

  4. Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. Says:

    Since you found that of interest, these may also be of interest:

    Robert Lewis Dabney. Women’s Rights Women.
    Robert Dabney- The Second Blast of the Trumpet
    Robert Dabney- The Third Blast of the Trumpet

  5. Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. Says:

    Since you found that of interest, these may also be of interest:

    Robert Lewis Dabney. Women’s Rights Women.
    Robert Dabney- The Second Blast of the Trumpet
    Robert Dabney- The Third Blast of the Trumpet

  6. Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. Says:

    Since you found that of interest, these may also be of interest:

    Robert Lewis Dabney. Women’s Rights Women.
    Robert Dabney- The Second Blast of the Trumpet
    Robert Dabney- The Third Blast of the Trumpet

  7. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Colonial Boy, thank you for the additional links!

  8. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Colonial Boy, thank you for the additional links!

  9. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Colonial Boy, thank you for the additional links!

  10. Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. Says:

    Oops – the Second and Third Blast of the Trumpets are actually by that most prolific of Authors – Anonymous.

  11. Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. Says:

    Oops – the Second and Third Blast of the Trumpets are actually by that most prolific of Authors – Anonymous.

  12. Mild Colonial Boy, Esq. Says:

    Oops – the Second and Third Blast of the Trumpets are actually by that most prolific of Authors – Anonymous.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: