Men's Group

. . . because of its implication of gender determinism, or determinism, period. However, I haven't had one radfem or feminist helpful enough to verify if that's the case.

I tried to say that sociobiology implies no such thing. That a biologist doesn't see genetics as determining outcomes at all, if anything, they see genes providing possibilities.

Though I have to admit, they may be suspicious as male scientists tell them certain facts, theories and hypotheses. They may think the data has been cooked to undercut feminism. In presuming the data is corrupt, they then throw it out and make their own guess. And wouldn't you know, they base their guesses on social science, a category of academia known for it's reliable data and unbiased researchers, all of whom in no way want to prove their own theories and launch social movements based on them.


Until you actually get more female scientists into the sociobiology or psycho-biology fields, you're not going to settle this. Not when distrust is running so high.