Mike S. Adams is pretending to knowledge of evolutionary biology again, in service to his insane ideas about feminism. It’s ugly and stupid.
My understanding of (and disrespect for) the underpinnings of modern feminism was actually fostered by a biologist who once made a very candid remark about the foundation of his support of Darwinism. When asked about the lack of evidence supporting Darwinism — the fossil record, etc. — he confessed there was a very human reason for his faith in evolutionary theory despite the lack of scientific evidence. He confessed that if Darwinism were not true, he wouldn’t be able to sleep around.
At the heart of his support for Darwinism was a desire to get God out of the picture by any means whatsoever. And his desire to get God out of the picture was in turn motivated by his desire to copulate with as many people as possible without feeling guilty. I wonder whether some untenured psychologist would dare to publish a paper called “A Cognitive Dissonance Theory of Human Devolution.” I think we all know the answer to that question.
I’m calling Adams out on this one: he’s lying. There’s this Friedmanesque habit on the far right of inventing these characters who are supposedly informed, knowledgeable agents working on the side the right-winger detests, who nonetheless conveniently make statements supporting their opposition, yet reveal that their mouthpiece knows about as much on the subject as their interrogator. Such is the case with this anonymous “biologist”. Ask a biologist about the lack of evidence, and they will not invent some bogus rationale…they’ll start ticking off lists of evidence on their fingers to refute the implicit assumption. I know. I’ve done it. I’ve seen my colleagues do it. His invented “biologist” does not ring true at all. (Oh, and we’d also correct the questioner on that strange term, “Darwinism”. It’s a creationist affectation)
For another, his excuse makes no sense. A basic parameter of reproductive success is not a measure of what a human being ought to do; also, biologists are well aware that there is more to reproductive success than copulation. Was the promiscuous biologist also avoiding contraception, and trying to get lots of random women pregnant? Does anyone in their right mind think that is a sensible strategy for propagating one’s genes?
It’s also simply irrational. Creationists sleep around, too. Biologists who accept the evidence of evolution, like me, do not. There is no connection between belief in a theory and sexual behavior.
All Adams has done is invent a phony puppet to personify his caricature of what evolution says—an utterly ridiculous puppet with no plausibility. The man is an incorrigible liar.
Why would he lie? He needs a few cardboard cutouts around to reassure him that he’s right when he says even more stupid things. The point of his “Darwinist” sockpuppet was to justify an even more outrageous accusation.
Feminism is a minority social movement, whose members murder innocent children in order to obtain sexual gratification.
That’s also a most contemptible lie. If it were true, would feminists have so readily adopted contraception? Would they lobby for equality in the workplace? For better healthcare? For protection from abusive spouses? For more research into breast cancer? For the right to raise their children as single parents? For lesbian couples to have children, with both having full parental rights? Look at what feminists do to determine what they want. It has nothing to do with Adams’ claim.
Actually, I suspect that if you looked at who gets sexual gratification from killing children, you’re going to be looking at a seamy minority of almost entirely male pedophiles. And I’d be surprised if any of them could be characterized as feminists.
I’m going to have to remember this article, next time that vile little man comes nosing around college campuses. There’s nothing like a blatant series of unbelievable and offensive lies to discredit one of these scumbag wingnuts.