Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Evolutionary Biology and Feminism

  • Maryanne L. FisherEmail author
  • Rebecca L. Burch
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_3189-1

Synonyms

Definition

There has been an ongoing uneasy relationship between evolutionary biology and feminism(s) due to highly differing perspectives about objectivity in science, issues of sex differences, and the role of biology versus social and cultural construction.

Introduction

The tension between evolutionary biology and feminism(s) is palpable when it comes to understanding and explaining human behavior. At times, there seems to be no space for integrating the two perspectives: for example, Birke (2017) discusses how biological sex (i.e., anatomically female or male) and more generally the “ghost of biology” still remains problematic for feminist thought. Typically, feminists often view evolutionary based research as anti-feminist, reductionist, and neglecting the inclusion of social and cultural influences. This tension has been documented for at least four decades by a range of scholars (Fausto-Sterling 1997; Fedigan 1986; Fisher et al. in press...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Åsberg, C., & Birke, L. (2010). Biology is a feminist issue: Interview with Lynda Birke. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 17(4), 413–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barkow, J. H. (2006). Introduction: Sometimes the bus does wait. In J. H. Barkow (Ed.), Missing the revolution: Darwinism for social scientists (pp. 3–62). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Birke, L. (2017). Bodies and biology. In J. Price & M. Shildrick (Eds.), Feminist theory and the body: A reader. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Campbell, A. (2006). Feminism and evolutionary psychology. In J. H. Barkow (Ed.), Missing the revolution: Darwinism for social scientists (pp. 63–99). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1999). The truth about Cinderella: A Darwinian view of parental love. Princeton: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Eagly, A., & Wood, W. (2011). Feminism and the evolution of sex differences and similarities. Sex Roles, 64, 758–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fausto-Sterling, A. (1997). Feminism and behavioral evolution: A taxonomy. In P. Gowaty (Ed.), Feminist and evolutionary biology: Boundaries, intersections, and frontiers. New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Fausto-Sterling, A., Gowaty, P. A., & Zuk, M. (1997). Evolutionary psychology and Darwinian feminism. Feminist Studies, 23, 403–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fedigan, L. M. (1986). The changing role of women in models of human evolution. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 25–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fisher, M., Sokol Chang, R., & Garcia, J. (2013). Introduction to Evolution’s empress. In M. Fisher, J. Garcia, & R. Chang (Eds.), Evolution’s empress: Darwinian perspectives on the nature of women (pp. 1–16). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fisher, M., Garcia, J., & Burch, R. (in press). Evolutionary psychology: Thoughts on integrating feminist perspectives. In L. Workman, W. Reader, & J. Barkow (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of evolutionary perspectives on human behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Garcia, J. R., & Heywood, L. L. (2016). Moving toward integrative feminist evolutionary behavioral sciences. Feminism & Psychology, 26(3), 327–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gowaty, P. A. (1997). Darwinian feminists and feminist evolutionists. In P. A. Gowaty (Ed.), Feminism and evolutionary biology (pp. 1–7). New York: Chapman.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gowaty, P. A. (2013). A sex-neutral theoretical framework for making strong inferences about the origins of sex roles. In M. L. Fisher, J. R. Garcia, & R. Sokol Chang (Eds.), Evolution’s empress: Darwinian perspectives on the nature of women. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hager, L. D. (1997). Women in human evolution. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Hankinson Nelson, L. (2017). Biology and feminism: A philosophical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haraway, D. (1978). Animal sociology and a natural economy of the body politic, part I: A political physiology of dominance. Signs, 4(1), 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heywood, L. L. (2013). The quick and the dead: Gendered agency in the history of Western science and evolutionary theory. In M. L. Fisher, J. R. Garcia, & R. Sokol-Chang (Eds.), Evolution’s empress: Darwinian perspectives on the nature of women. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hrdy, S. B. (1981). The woman that never evolved. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hrdy, S. B. (1986). Empathy, polyandry, and the myth of the coy female. In R. Bleier (Ed.), Feminist approaches to science. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  21. Janicki, M., & Krebs, D. L. (1998). Evolutionary approaches to culture. In C. Crawford & D. L. Krebs (Eds.), Handbook on evolutionary psychology: Ideas, issues and applications. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Kelly, S. (2014). Tofu feminism: Can feminist theory absorb evolutionary psychology? Dialectical Anthropology, 38(3), 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nier, J. A., & Campbell, S. D. (2013). Two outsiders’ view on feminism and evolutionary psychology: An opportune time for adversarial collaboration. Sex Roles, 69, 503–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Radtke, H. L. (2017). Feminist theory in Feminism & Psychology [Part 1]: Dealing with differences and negotiating the biological. Feminism & Psychology, 27(3), 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smuts, B. (1995). The evolutionary origins of patriarchy. Human Nature, 6(1), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Snyder, R. C. (2008). What is third-wave feminism? A new directions essay. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 34(1), 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sokol-Chang, R., & Fisher, M. L. (2013). Letter of purpose of the feminist evolutionary psychology society. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 7(4), 286–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. T. (2001). A natural history of rape: Biological bases of sexual coercion. Cambridge: MIT press.Google Scholar
  29. Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man: 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  30. Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1998). Lethal and nonlethal violence against wives and the evolutionary psychology of male sexual proprietariness. In R. E. Dobash & R. P. Dobash (Eds.), Rethinking violence against wives (pp. 199–230). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologySaint Mary’s UniversityHalifaxCanada
  2. 2.State University of New York at OswegoOswegoUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Valerie G. Starratt
    • 1
  1. 1.Nova Southeastern UniversityFort LauderdaleUSA