FEMINISM AND SCIENCE: A spot of rewiring.
I am hardwired to feel tenderness towards young
children, and to seek protection from men. I naturally tend towards romantic
interests who make me feel that they could provide for me, and am genetically
predisposed to value loyalty and intelligence over good looks. I am also a
feminist. And personally, I don’t think anything that I just said is
contradictory.
Feminists shouldn’t be scared of the idea of what’s
‘natural’ to females. Empowering women doesn’t mean denying that they aren’t
men. I was born a female, and I am as such, to a certain extent, ‘naturally’
different from someone born male. Whether that’s how my brain works now, or how my brain worked then, is a separate point. As it
happens, I grew up a woman, and am probably to a certain extent influenced by
my ‘natural femininity’ even now. However, I could have grown up to be someone showing
no personality traits associated with ‘traditional femininity’; or, I could
have grown up to be someone who identified as a man. No scientist I know would
say that any of these was wrong. It is
all too easy to look at any bit of writing claiming to reveal what women (or
men) are ‘hardwired’ to do or think, and feel outraged. It’s ridiculous – you can’t
say that half of the population all experience and approach the world in one homogenous
way, can you? What about all those incredibly caring men? What about those
women who have no maternal instinct whatsoever? What about the competitive,
ambitious female businesswomen and the sensitive, aesthetically-minded male
artists? Are we going to dismiss them all as ‘abnormal’? As going against
nature?
Well... kind of, yes.
Bear with me, here. I think the problem we have
here is that we have somehow come to fetishize being ‘natural’. Some of it for
good reasons – I buy organic when I can, am sufficiently lazy to appreciate not
having to cake odd-smelling brown stuff onto my face every morning and will
gladly frolic in a wildflower meadow given opportunity. I do not like wholly unnatural
things like deforestation, morbid obesity or nuclear weapons. Some natural is
good, some unnatural is bad. But if there’s one thing the world order, natural
or not, doesn’t like then it’s a hard-and-fast rule.
I mean – tape
worms, they’re natural. High infant mortality – part of human life for
thousands of years. Bad breath, going bare-foot, yearly migration, celery (just me?), bubonic plague, living
in caves – they’re all just as Mother
Nature intended. The point is
that just because we’ve evolved to do something over a few thousand years doesn’t
mean that in 2013 we haven’t stopped
doing them for very good reasons. If that squirrel with bubonic place in America has his way, we might suddenly all find ourselves getting natural in a plaguey
sort of way again, but I’m not supporting the Black Death coming back again,
even if it is natural for us to incubate disease and spread among ourselves to
our own detriment (sorry, squirrel).
Conversely, there is nothing natural about: running water, developing ways to find
adequate nutrition without killing the same things we draw on Easter cards,
surviving cancer, human flight, cake. The last one might sound stupid, but
stupid things often provide the best illustration of a point. Thinking about
making yourself a cheeky Victoria Sponge: natural process? Well, first off you
have to turn the oven on. Except that of course that requires man-made
technology and a load of gas sucked (against nature) out of the ground, none of
which are processes which human beings are innately given to. Even putting
aside the oven issue, we’ve got the ingredients to worry about. There’s nothing
natural about butter; or bicarb; or even flour, really, because we only learned to do that, didn’t we? Some
genius looked at a load of grain and thought – wonder what would happen if I
ground it up a bit? Answer: not a lot, until we get to a First Baker, who
looked back down the line of grain-grinders and metal-box-smelters and bread-makers
and thought, ‘wonder what would happen if’, and created the cake. He/She probably
didn’t do it in a gas oven, with eggs from a chicken-farm and flour bought at a
huge superstore, but the basic idea was the same, and all it takes is a bit of
fast forwarding to reach the Victoria Sponge. A lot of people might accept the
use of fire, and the municipal farming methods as being down to ‘evolution’,
but that does force me to ask – what about the rest of it? The question is – at
what point did cake-making stop being ‘natural’?
Actually, no. Scratch that. The question really is – why the hell does it matter? Cake is good. It tastes nice. There
are numerous difficulties with farming methods and use of fossil fuels that we
will not get into now, because the niceness is the most pertinent point. Are we
going to stop enjoying afternoon tea because it’s not uncooked steak with a few
foraged berries? Erm, no. Let us eat bloody cake.
SO – to return to the original matter in hand. It
is natural for me, as a woman, to want to be a mother, a faithful sexual
partner, and a provider for the assembled brood. It is probably natural for me
to a certain extent to fancy tall, broad-shouldered men with six packs who look
like they throw a good spear and could handle a bison. So what? Whether it’s
evolution, human nature striving towards unnatural ends or sheer bloody mindedness,
I and most other women have moved beyond that
point. We’ve invented the metaphorical wheel, discovered the figural fire – we’ve
come up with this thing called equality, and we now think that all humans being
fundamentally deserving the same opportunities in life might be quite good,
actually.
In a similar way, we came up with this thing called
love, and decided that it might be alright for some people to be gay. We came
up with this thing called empathy and decided that we might not force people to
live with intense pain if they rationally made a choice that they didn’t want to.
We got past having to do everything just because we needed to in order to
survive, and we discovered choice.
In that case, why do we need scientists looking
back and telling us what we used to
be like, I hear you ask. Because we have to acknowledge some parts of scientific
truth, in order to recognise social truths. It’s not dangerous to say that men
are in a primal way to women with child-bearing hip-ratios, or that women are
in a basic sense programmed to be more attuned to emotional states. The problem
arises when we accept that as a limitation, not a simple starting point. There’s
no getting around the fact that men and women are biologically different, and
some of those biological effects might reside in the brain, too. But so what.
The brain is an incredibly complex organ that no-one understands properly, but
we do not that it is malleable. If it
wasn’t, we would stay as we are from birth – without language, without
emotional understanding, able to do what we are programmed to do, which is to
demand nutrition, cry, and defecate.
Science which tells us something about what we
started off as is not dangerous. Shoddy articles which make it look like that’s
what we’re fated to end up – they’re dangerous.
But as feminists we need to distinguish between the two. Good science and good
feminism aren’t incompatible, even when the first has something to say about ‘natural’
gender differences. It’s those people who argue that we should limited to and defined by these differences who deserve
our outrage, for it’s those people who are hijacking science and using it to
justify any number of hideous, sexist things which demean both men and women. Surely
we’ve done enough twin studies by now to realise that we are not the product of genes alone?
That said, I’m prepared to give the sexists a
chance, too, just so long as they’ll walk their talk. I’ll stick to the way I was
born, the way I was ‘in nature’, if they will. That is, I’ll trade motherhood and
domestication for going back to breast-milk and falling over unless propped up.
Or to living in cave, starving at
winter, and getting carried off by wolves. Either is fine by me. Whatever comes
naturally.
No comments:
Post a Comment