TOOTHLESS TIGER

A recent author interview on Jim Lehrer's P.B.S. Newshour brought back some memories of earlier times in the Woman's Movement.  Today women receive the slings and arrows of the Rychus Religious Ones, but in the 70s we were attacked by male experts on everything anthropological who wrote articles for magazines such as Playboy, Penthouse or Parade, to name a few.

These self-styled experts took it upon themselves to explain to women why their Movement was *unnatural* and why in the natural order of things, males were responsible for all the good things in the world such as marriage and family values.  They argued that men were hardwired to take control and be the dominant human and women were biologically engineered to child bearing and rearing.

Therefore, they insisted, we were tearing down that natural order because women were not capable or strong enough to live without a male to take care of them.  Now comes one of this genre, Lionel Tiger, with a new book, The Decline of Males, to say, "Look what you made us do."

In his P.B.S. interview, he declared that a man used to marry the woman they knocked up because "he knew he was the father," but now he "has a problem not knowing and is unwilling to support some other man's child."

Obviously influenced by that Smurf who has characterized the war between the sexes as interplanetary warfare, Lionel claims that evolution formed males to be something different than they are forced to act now.  He declared that the pill was the turning point that caused the increase in single mothers, abortions, and the decline of males.

Well, you see where all this is leading -- Eve strikes again.  She just used a pill instead of an apple.  It's all her fault.  Nothing has changed in Lionel's mind since the 70s when he and his ilk proclaimed some fantastic anthropological reasons for lots of things but by far the funniest was "Why women evolved to have large breasts all the time when other mammalian female breasts enlarge noticeably only when nursing young."

It was because of men.  They preferred big-breasted women so they mated with them more frequently than with no-breasted women.  Sure we laughed at that because what they were saying was that way back when humans lived in caves along with the other animals, males preferred to mate with "mothers," or else these were the only women (hampered with a nursing babe, no doubt) that the guys could catch.

Yes, really funny until we discovered that ridiculous explanation had been swallowed hook, line and sinker by enough males so it that it is still being passed on to following generations. We remember a medical school lecture given by Professor Carson Cornbrooks III on the female reproductive system as a case in point.

Carson stated that "the primary function of the female breast was to attract a male." Back when there were either one or no women in med school classes, that comment would have been ignored or laughed at by the class, but now, women made up a third of the class.

Both female and male students took violent issue with him, reminding him that the structure of the mammary gland was obviously indicative of milk production for the young.  In response, Carson cited the Lionel Tiger group of "experts."

Student response to his explanation was mostly negative as the professor learned when the evaluations came in.  One student, a male, wrote the following:

"The instructor needs to be more than one page ahead of the class in understanding the material.  How can you teach what you do not know?  I was also offended by the so-called anthropological function he gave of the female breast.  I am familiar with some of the literature which supports the statements in his lecture but was not aware that The Naked Ape or Penthouse and Playboy magazines were regarded as competent medical school publications.

"The underlying tragedy of this incident is that it demonstrates the ease with which non-scientific hypothesis are disseminated without any thought.  This, I think, is a poor reflection on the department and the faculty."

Medical schools have long been populated by myopic males beset by testosterone poisoning.  We remember being told that all the fuss over funding women's sports was a waste of money.  Women, they asserted could not engage in sports because they could not run.  Instead of their legs going straight forward like men's do, theirs had to go in a half circle because of their pelvic structure.

Well, sure.  Most women do have a different pelvic structure then men, but the circular motion one may see is caused by the fact that many women are trained to walk with one foot placed directly in front of the other.  This is the walk you see exaggerated by models and the purpose is to make your ass sway back and forth.

One of the first things a woman, who defines herself, does is walk naturally with her feet apart and legs straight down from where they connect to her trunk.  She walks like a human being, balanced and erect.  She walks like she did as a young child.  She can run like the wind just as she did as a youngster, once she has thrown aside those idiotic stiletto heels and treats her feet and spine right with decent shoes and natural posture.

Women can't run?  <maniacal laughter>  Maybe we should let the W.N.B.A. and The World Cup WOMEN'S Soccer Team in on that.

Twanda@ConnRiver.net                 MEANWHILE... ANOTHER VIEW ON HOW THE BREAST WAS WON...?

1999-033

Copyright 1999 Renee T. Louise and Ruth M. Sprague, Ph.D. These articles may be republished for noncommercial use only, provided that they are copied intact, and that this copyright notice is attached. Address all queries to: twanda@ConnRiver.net.

G e n d e r G a p p e r s   ^{T M}