Nice to see some other opinions on this topic, having this old story by an old man prof in the 60s being criticised is good. Seems like evolutionary anthropology has been plagued by a bit of old school sexism
Sexism is when a scientific theory is challenged.
Absolute American take on the situation.
A bit off the mark there, I did not mean that sexism is when a theory is challenged, and neither am I American.
I was referring to the fact that most of these evolutionary anthropology dogmas were established a long time ago by men, when science had basically no participation by women (That's the sexist bit). So now when our slightly more balanced scientists look at these old dogmas they can start to challenge it. In those times saying that women don't run as efficiently because of wider hips would probably not have raised any discussion (Because there were no women). Now women can rightly challenge it and look for data to support the claim, which seems to be lacking, and in fact it supports the null hypothesis that it does not affect efficiency of running.
I also don't mean it has to be women to challenge that idea, but it makes sense to me that they would be more likely to.
Nice to see some other opinions on this topic, having this old story by an old man prof in the 60s being criticised is good. Seems like evolutionary anthropology has been plagued by a bit of old school sexism
Sexism is when a scientific theory is challenged.
Absolute American take on the situation.
A bit off the mark there, I did not mean that sexism is when a theory is challenged, and neither am I American. I was referring to the fact that most of these evolutionary anthropology dogmas were established a long time ago by men, when science had basically no participation by women (That's the sexist bit). So now when our slightly more balanced scientists look at these old dogmas they can start to challenge it. In those times saying that women don't run as efficiently because of wider hips would probably not have raised any discussion (Because there were no women). Now women can rightly challenge it and look for data to support the claim, which seems to be lacking, and in fact it supports the null hypothesis that it does not affect efficiency of running.
I also don't mean it has to be women to challenge that idea, but it makes sense to me that they would be more likely to.