Evolutionary theory and feminism

Abstract

It is often argued that evolutionary theory and feminism remain in tension, since the evolutionary view of human nature is hard to reconcile with the feminist view. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that this thesis is false. This goal is realized by reconstructing a certain anti-feminist evolutionary argument (whose descriptive conclusion is the “patriarchal” picture of male and female nature, and the normative conclusion is the claim that given the deep differences between men and women the feminist postulates cannot be achieved) and providing its critique. The argument is based on three premises: a theory of parental investment, the assumption of a relatively large (compared with other species) men’s parental investment in ancestral environments, and the uncertainty of paternity. Its (descriptive) conclusion is the claim that men are “by nature” much more polygamously disposed, much more desirous of power (over the opposite sex), and much more aggressive than women. The paper presents several objections to this argument. The first objection questions its internal coherence. The second one points at its counterintuitive (not supported by empirical facts) consequences. The third one criticizes one of the assumptions of the argument, i.e. the assumption about a relatively large (compared with other species) men’s parental investment in ancestral environments.