Calling Out: Glenn Geher Ph.D. & Psychologytoday

Liliyan Hassan Call-out Leave a Comment

There is an article published in psychologytoday entitled, Laws of Human Behavior—How evolution has changed the scientific face of psychology because evolution is the constant state under which people need to be measured given that it is okay to treat women as if we are animals. In the article, Mr. Geher tells us that he will, “demarcate two of the most basic ideas in the field of evolutionary psychology – framed here as scientific laws with derivative principles that follow.” And then he proceeds by stating those two laws as the following:

“Law #1: Behavioral adaptations are Darwinian adaptations and, like any Darwinian adaptations, they ultimately serve the function of increasing the probability of survival and/or reproduction.”

“Law #2: Evolutionary mismatch leads to observable behavioral outcomes when the differences between modern and ancestral environments are substantially discordant.”

Those are not scientific laws at all, however. Adaption in relation to psychology when it happens through evolutionary mechanisms is not a thing that increases the probability of survival. On the contrary, evolution becomes an energy wasting mental state that is drained and tired and ready to commit suicide.  Adaption is not a state of getting used to change…but psychologically speaking it is a state of getting used to no change as that becomes a state of harm since the change is negative. For women, adapting to a world of abuse has not increased our chance of survival due to adapting to anything past the mental state of men whenever they are not adopting their theory of “butchering women  if they do not do as told”. Hence, we have not adapted to survive out of our own evolutionary changes: for those who have not gotten killed, we have dodged a bullet.

Law two is also wrong.  Glenn wrote that, “A basic premise of Darwin’s take on evolution is that organisms were shaped by natural selection to have features (both physical and behavioral) that fit with the details of a particular environment.”  Yes, we fit with the particular environment as if that is not against resilience and against having “better traits”. Mind wise, the self is a thing to uphold as higher than environment. That is the mechanism of self-defense. Or no? Apparently, however, we just fit into an environmental mold that shapes us without retaliation as if self-hatred is a thing great given that men have rewarded many for hating themselves. Yes, we shall hate ourselves and survive and let us call that a freaking life since who cares?! When environment shapes humans, Mr. Glenn, it is often a result of imposition. And although the truth does stagger in the back of one’s mind, it is often useless all the way to our death beds. And although many who voluntarily love their environment more easily adapt to it, it is them that is the environment and it is them who have shaped it. The sun is hot today however and I do have a tiny chicken that is broody as hell because she is not supposed to live in America but we do not give a crap because they are just chickens and we can just throw them anywhere we want. Is the chicken’s psychology giving a crap about adapting or is it saying, “screw yall…I will go to my little corner alone for a while you garbage of people”? Why is the chicken not loving the heat? And why does it not give a crap that I do not want her to be broody? Is she not even asserting herself over me whether I like it or not? Is the environment molding her to like the heat or is she just too Dyke of a chicken to lose a fight against the sun itself? But, understanding is adaptive to bullshit, however, specially in dealing with close minded men who do not mind us having to understand the concept that their piss is valued bigger than our lives just because such sentence can be uttered as to draw an imagery in our heads.

“Soft science” (as the article tries to paint evolution to be while Mr. Glenn defends against such term) is not a funny concept as one wants to throw terms around in a nonchalant manner when we are in the midst of an all serious pleasure-giving-session towards men as their personal inferior slaves with our heads as their bounty. What is so soft these days anyways that is not fixed ASAP as if anything kind is broken? Is evolution a soft science and where is its “softness” projected as all we are receiving is a monkey title? And where is the soft in science that is not found in one saying, “I ate too much beans and that is why I am farting”? Scientifically soft indeed although true. But evolution is not soft science as it is lesser in value than the farting statement above. We were monkeys, therefore we are humans today—that is not soft and neither is it logical and neither is it sane. Although if we want to explain the insanity under which men have carried their ventures, then indeed monkeys may get offended. There is a lack of scientific evidence whenever one wants to project his existence on those who cannot talk, however, as a form of abuse in regards to the silencing of people. What else are people going to say and how can they object? If one can draw points of logic, it becomes an acceptable explanation if one is not that concerned. And hence, women are not as much concerned about that as men are given that our main concern is not to be abused by the other various theories that men have subjected us to.

Evolution is a nice premise as one is able to substitute change which men are not willing to make into a formula that considers him having done it. Men have changed through evolution although I do not see it. But evolution says that they have—From a monkey at least—- as if we can cross species in order to provide further “understandable” assistance to make the lives of others better since that appears to be the reason for why we are here. With evolution, you can have it both way, ladies: you can change and adapt to men all at once. And it is soft: just the way you like to be treated, softly and gently. Handling us is not a thing that even an animal is willing to entertain. And many animals have ran a suicidal discourse out of the thought that a man may otherwise be the one to get them. When time itself has given men all the time there is to change in regards to not abusing us, evolution seems to have failed major ba#@s. Where is the evolution or the revolution? Ovulation: that is the closest we will get in regards to having enough of the letters to make up for either of those.


About the Author
Liliyan Hassan

Liliyan Hassan

Founder: Go for Women

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *