Monsieur Chauvin
04-29-2009, 05:49 AM
What Is Sex Realism Or Scientific Sexism?
Sex realism is both the natural complement and logical extension of race realism. As a purely theoretical framework, it is solidly predicated upon the notion that there exists an objective biological basis that underlies male-female sexual differences. The central pivot upon which it is founded is a candid acknowledgement, well-substantiated by a large and growing body of empirical evidence, that the actual neurophysiological divergence between male and female absolutely transcends mere sexual dimorphism in terms of genitalia. Consequently, the sex realist fully comprehends, through an in-depth and systematic analysis of all available empirical data, that sex differences are more than just penis and vagina, just as the race realist completely acknowledges that racial differences are more than just skin colour. However, just as the race realist is no hide-bound dogmatist on the subject of race, neither is the sex realist; both are not afraid to boldly confront contrarian perspectives or assimilate diametrically opposed viewpoints when they have been empirically validated by means of the hypothetico-deductive method, regardless of whether such theories are rigidly social constructionist or adhere to a strict hereditarian model.
The sex realist willingly concedes that the actual discrepancies between both male and female patterns of neurophysiological development are both real and nontrivial, as well as being quite substantial. Moreover, he is a thoroughgoing hereditarian who is immersed in the latest sociobiological/evolutionary psychological literature on human sexual dimorphism. Because of his rigorous analysis of all empirical data on the subject of sex differences, he frequently demonstrates a generalized tendency to eschew most culture-only theories of social constructivism and Marxist anthropology as being idealistic and not entirely representative of the available evidence. Nevertheless, consistent with the modern scientific research, he generally acknowledges as valid an hereditarian model based on anywhere between a 50% genetic-50% environmental to an 80% genetic-20% environmental influence upon the existence of psychosexual differentiation between both sexes. This explanation provides a much more coherent framework in which to fully integrate the sum totality of available empirical data than the social constructionist 0% genetic-100% environmental contribution to human socio-sexual behaviour as currently being advocated by the Boasian school of cultural anthropology. In other words, the differences between male and female are much more attributable to genetics and the forces of biological evolution than they are to such culture-only factors as stereotype threat, institutionalized sexism, sex-typical patterns of socialization, male chauvinism, sex bias on tests, and the so-called “patriarchy” of the feminist imagination. The sex realist recognizes that there is a significant genetic contribution to human sexual dimorphism; he also fully comprehends the fact that social constructionist theories are inadequate when it comes to shedding light upon the obviously neurophysiological aspects of human psycho-sexual development.
Hence, the sex realist is honest about what the latest scientific evidence reveals concerning the presence and extent of sexual dimorphism within the human species. He recognizes the intellectual inferiority of the female and understands that there exists both a permanent, as well as a highly significant gap in male-female intelligence of approximately 5-10 IQ points; he acknowledges that the female is biologically inferior to the male, possessing little physical strength, lower aggression, and hardly any motivation to succeed; the sex realist admits that women have smaller brains, even when adjusted for their smaller body size, lesser neurons, and possesses a minuscule quantity of that grey matter which is heavily IQ-related and specifically designed for information processing; that women are more dependent on instinct and blood serum concentration of hormones than males, to the extent that the entire psychological state of the female is often predetermined by her maternal instinct and the hormonal fluctuations which are ultimately regulated by her menstrual period; he also acknowledges that the male has greater visuo-spatial abilities than the female, and is therefore much more logical and analytical, whereas the female is dependent on blind emotion and primitive instinct. Furthermore, the sex realist understands that the male has less emotions than the female, but feels much more deeply and possesses emotions which are much profounder. The man is more extroverted and sociable than the female, who happens to be a naturally selfish, reclusive creature by virtue of her greater differential parental investment in the act of sexual reproduction.
Therefore, in light of the foregoing, the sex realist is refreshingly open and honest about the differences between man and woman and does not attempt to dismiss the reality of human sexual dimorphism by using moralistic fallacy; to wit, social prescriptions of what ought to be being deliberately substituted for what actually is. He realizes that no amount of social engineering or theorizing along social constructivist lines will efface such differences. With the gradual dissemination of conservative ideology across the length and breadth of the West, both sex and race realism will once and for all dispossess social constructionism and Marxist anthropology.
Sex realism is both the natural complement and logical extension of race realism. As a purely theoretical framework, it is solidly predicated upon the notion that there exists an objective biological basis that underlies male-female sexual differences. The central pivot upon which it is founded is a candid acknowledgement, well-substantiated by a large and growing body of empirical evidence, that the actual neurophysiological divergence between male and female absolutely transcends mere sexual dimorphism in terms of genitalia. Consequently, the sex realist fully comprehends, through an in-depth and systematic analysis of all available empirical data, that sex differences are more than just penis and vagina, just as the race realist completely acknowledges that racial differences are more than just skin colour. However, just as the race realist is no hide-bound dogmatist on the subject of race, neither is the sex realist; both are not afraid to boldly confront contrarian perspectives or assimilate diametrically opposed viewpoints when they have been empirically validated by means of the hypothetico-deductive method, regardless of whether such theories are rigidly social constructionist or adhere to a strict hereditarian model.
The sex realist willingly concedes that the actual discrepancies between both male and female patterns of neurophysiological development are both real and nontrivial, as well as being quite substantial. Moreover, he is a thoroughgoing hereditarian who is immersed in the latest sociobiological/evolutionary psychological literature on human sexual dimorphism. Because of his rigorous analysis of all empirical data on the subject of sex differences, he frequently demonstrates a generalized tendency to eschew most culture-only theories of social constructivism and Marxist anthropology as being idealistic and not entirely representative of the available evidence. Nevertheless, consistent with the modern scientific research, he generally acknowledges as valid an hereditarian model based on anywhere between a 50% genetic-50% environmental to an 80% genetic-20% environmental influence upon the existence of psychosexual differentiation between both sexes. This explanation provides a much more coherent framework in which to fully integrate the sum totality of available empirical data than the social constructionist 0% genetic-100% environmental contribution to human socio-sexual behaviour as currently being advocated by the Boasian school of cultural anthropology. In other words, the differences between male and female are much more attributable to genetics and the forces of biological evolution than they are to such culture-only factors as stereotype threat, institutionalized sexism, sex-typical patterns of socialization, male chauvinism, sex bias on tests, and the so-called “patriarchy” of the feminist imagination. The sex realist recognizes that there is a significant genetic contribution to human sexual dimorphism; he also fully comprehends the fact that social constructionist theories are inadequate when it comes to shedding light upon the obviously neurophysiological aspects of human psycho-sexual development.
Hence, the sex realist is honest about what the latest scientific evidence reveals concerning the presence and extent of sexual dimorphism within the human species. He recognizes the intellectual inferiority of the female and understands that there exists both a permanent, as well as a highly significant gap in male-female intelligence of approximately 5-10 IQ points; he acknowledges that the female is biologically inferior to the male, possessing little physical strength, lower aggression, and hardly any motivation to succeed; the sex realist admits that women have smaller brains, even when adjusted for their smaller body size, lesser neurons, and possesses a minuscule quantity of that grey matter which is heavily IQ-related and specifically designed for information processing; that women are more dependent on instinct and blood serum concentration of hormones than males, to the extent that the entire psychological state of the female is often predetermined by her maternal instinct and the hormonal fluctuations which are ultimately regulated by her menstrual period; he also acknowledges that the male has greater visuo-spatial abilities than the female, and is therefore much more logical and analytical, whereas the female is dependent on blind emotion and primitive instinct. Furthermore, the sex realist understands that the male has less emotions than the female, but feels much more deeply and possesses emotions which are much profounder. The man is more extroverted and sociable than the female, who happens to be a naturally selfish, reclusive creature by virtue of her greater differential parental investment in the act of sexual reproduction.
Therefore, in light of the foregoing, the sex realist is refreshingly open and honest about the differences between man and woman and does not attempt to dismiss the reality of human sexual dimorphism by using moralistic fallacy; to wit, social prescriptions of what ought to be being deliberately substituted for what actually is. He realizes that no amount of social engineering or theorizing along social constructivist lines will efface such differences. With the gradual dissemination of conservative ideology across the length and breadth of the West, both sex and race realism will once and for all dispossess social constructionism and Marxist anthropology.