Shulamith Firestone was a Feminist writer who did enough thinking about Feminism to realise that there were some conflicts between Feminism and Biology. If there is a conflict between Feminism and Biology (to paraphrase her words), so much the worse for Biology !

In that context, and in view of the way that Feminism has become mainstream in the West, it is not surprising to find the following (and other similar) passage(s) in the book Brain Sex, by Anne Moir and David Jessel:

"Some researchers have been frankly dismayed at what they have discovered. Some of their findings have been, if not suppressed, at least quietly shelved because of their potential social impact. But it is usually better to act on the basis of what is true, rather than to maintain, with the best will in the world, that what is true has no right to be so" (on page 7 of the 1991 Delta edition).

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that Western Democracies prided themselves on their free press, freedom of expression, and freedom of access to information ! What does Democracy mean, if Feminists are able to suppress inconvenient scientific facts, like Stalin and Hitler ?

The essay Men, Women, and Ghosts in Science, by Peter Lawrence, was discussed on 13 March 2006 on National Radio's Nine-to-Noon programme. That essay states:

"The Cambridge University Psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen published research on the 'male brain' in a specialist journal in 1997, but did not dare talk about his ideas in public for several years. One reason for this absurd taboo is that we cannot think objectively because our minds are full of wayward beliefs and delusions -- 'ghosts'. And one of these ghosts is the dogma that all groups of people, such as men and women, are on average the same, and any genetic distinctions must not be countenanced. Such ghosts bias our perceptions and censor our thoughts.... Baron-Cohen presents evidence that males on average are biologically predisposed to systemise, to analyse, and to be more forgetful of others, while females on average are innately designed to empathise, to communicate, and to care for others."

Two points need to be made here:

So it is Feminism that has inflicted this undemocratic censorship ghost on us, and it is Feminism that has imposed sex-based Equal Employment Opportunities and Affirmative Action policies on us. If Equal Employment Opportunities means that everyone has the same opportunity to get a job which their abilities suit them for, then it must surely be a good thing. However, it often seems to mean that pressure will be applied to get more women (and selected other groups) into jobs than would get there on merit alone.

Equal Employment Opportunities policies are often deliberately vague, but the basic idea seems to be that, if a male and a female candidate are equally qualified for a particular job, the female candidate will be selected, if there are fewer females than males in that workplace. This is incoherent, because my impression is that two candiates are never exactly equally qualified for a particular job: there are so many different qualifications and experiences listed on most people's cv's, and so many different impressions that interviewers glean from the selection interview, that one candidate almost always has the edge over the others. So Equal Employment Opportunities policies actually have the result that less qualified women are preferred over more qualified men -- otherwise there would be no change in the over-all male-female ratios in that workplace, because there are never any situations where candidates are equally qualified !

The result of the Feminist "ghost" and of this type of Equal Employment Opportunities policy is that our workplaces are being dumbed down. More and more empathising, communicating, and caring women, and fewer and fewer systemising and analysing men are being hired. Job-descriptions are more and more being dumbed down by female-dominated Human Resources departments so as to emphasise things that, on average, women are good at.

See also: