This is a partial book review of: Bribiescas,
Richard G. (2006): Men: Evolutionary and Life History, Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
The Big Lie
As I said in my article, "Two Power-Shifting
Left-Wing Lies", the Feminists and other
Leftists have conquered and colonised all the professions, including
the professions that are involved in the education
sector, the media and the
Law. I have already written quite a bit
about various universities, but the following example of a university
lie (from the Conclusion of the above book, on page 219) is quite spectacular:
"The topic of human male evolutionary biology involves and
is interrelated with many issues that are at
the core of science: women's rights, psychology, violence,
warfare, socioeconomic conditions, and so on."
I have studied Political Science, the Philosophy of Science and various
scientific subjects and it is blatantly obvious that "women's rights"
is a political term and intrinsically has nothing at all to do with
science. You might expect that Bribiescas would at least explain his
apparently ludicrous statement, but he does not. The closest he comes
to explaining it is to ask:
"Can Biology predict which specific individual is destined
to be the next Hitler or the next abusive spouse?"
From that question, we can deduce that Bribiescas is blaming men for
warfare and for Domestic Violence. However, he provides no evidence
to back up these misandristic (man-hating) slurs. In fact, his Conclusion
(the final chapter) is seven pages long, but contains only seven references
to research articles or books. By contrast, the previous seven pages
contain 13 references to research articles or books and most of the
book contains several references per page. In the university context,
the supposedly evil nature of men is a fundamental
ideological belief, and requires no evidence. Nevertheless, as I
pointed out in my article, Women and War,
almost all of the prominent female leaders from recent decades were
involved in warlike activities and that is conclusive disproof of the
claim that female leaders are inherently more peaceful than male leaders.
And Professor
Martin Fiebert's annotated bibliography "examines 286 scholarly
investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses,
which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive,
than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners."
Glaring Omissions
-
On page 84, the author mentions that "The left hemisphere
of the brain is often smaller than the right in male fetuses, while
in female fetuses the brain tends to be more symmetrical."
-
He also mentions on page 86 that female fetuses had a larger corpus
callosum (the link between the two brain hemispheres) than male
fetuses.
-
However, he did not mention the well-known fact that "mean
brain size (weight or volume) is 9-12% larger in men than in women"
(S.F. Witelson, H. Beresh and D.L. Kigar "Intelligence and
brain size in 100 postmortem brains: sex, lateralization and age
factors," Brain 2006, 129, 386-398).
-
He also did not mention the fact that "men tend to modulate
their reaction to stimuli and engage in analysis and association,
whereas women tend to draw more on primary emotional reference"
(Hall et al. 2003, "Sex differences in functional activation
patterns revealed by increased emotion processing demands,"
Neuroreport Vol. 15 No. 2, 9 February 2004) -- i.e. that women are
less rational than men.
-
It is not surprising that he did not mention that testosterone
seems to reduce lying in men (implying that women possibly lie
more than men do, since they have less testosterone), because Bribiescas'
book was published in 2006, before this finding about testosterone
was published.
The clear pattern is that Bribiescas only mentions negative facts
about men and positive facts about women.
Why Lie?
The Acknowledgements of this book mention the author's wife. Ideally,
men should be able to write books about men without some woman looking
over their shoulder. We can only speculate as to whether she censored
or otherwise influenced the contents of this book. In addition, we have
to bear in mind that he was researching the topic of men, which is not
something that the Feminists are likely to have been very happy about.
In order to be allowed to do this, he would have had to make sure he
did not contradict any Feminist doctrines.
As I said in another book review, whether
involuntarily (because they have been brainwashed by their Feminist
environment) or deliberately (because they are Feminist activists, or
merely afraid for their careers), academics churn out slipshod and even
self-contradictory drivel which pleases their Feminist mistresses.
This has severe implications for the ability
of non-Feminist men to succeed in higher education.
See also:
|
