Carol Iannone notes that Evolutionary Psychology has a tendency to explain the present in terms of a past that it extrapolates from the present:
[N]ot long ago they were claiming that women were naturally monogamous. As female behavior grew wilder, they changed the evolutionary scenario to conjure up the prehistoric woman with serial partners. If contemporary women begin to curb themselves a bit as the culture keeps changing, and they probably will, the evolutionists will no doubt revise the scenario yet again.That being the case,"why should we accept this limited construct of human nature and of the potentialities of our lives"? Instead, let's accept an unlimited construct...one that does express an abiding truth about human nature, and will give us a better sense of the potentialities of our lives. Like for instance, the bedrock biological reality of the power that the "male gaze" has over women.
This scenario seems just to correspond with what we see of behavior today, and expresses no abiding truth about human nature.
Feminism is largely responsible for the cultivation of “beta males” by making men suppress their natural masculinity. The truth is, even the merest so-called beta has all the masculinity needed to attract women if only he would exercise it. The simplest masculine look or “male gaze” at certain moments can make females melt.Thus is sociobiology refuted! It's about time we stopped listening to all these just-so stories about masculine power and dominance, and accepted that "beta males" exist mainly because feminists have been emasculating perfectly serviceable men who would otherwise dominate them as Nature intended.
Also: Thanks to this marriage of convenience between EP and feminism, too many men are wearing baggy Hawaiian shirts and backwards baseball caps. Some of them even bake cakes! This behavior drastically reduces their reproductive fitness, because women don't really like men who bake cakes, unless they dress in properly masculine clothes, and maybe not even then. If you doubt this, consider the fact that this man will probably die alone and unloved even though he has a successful TV show. So much for Darwinism!