> As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is, and doesn't tell us what ought to be It unfortunately isn't that simple. About a century ago,

> As Mr. Hume told us a few hundred years ago, nature simply is, and doesn't tell us what ought to be It unfortunately isn't that simple. About a century ago, one of the fathers of social psychology, no less, and an opinion leader at the time, offered the following quote: > In the most intelligent races, as among the Parisians, there are a large number of women whose brains are closer in size to those of gorillas than to the most developed male brains. This inferiority is so obvious that no one can contest it for a moment; only its degree is worth discussion. All psychologists who have studied the intelligence of women, as well as poets and novelists, recognize today that they represent the most inferior forms of human evolution and that they are closer to children and savages than to an adult, civilized man. They excel in fickleness, inconstancy, absence of thought and logic, and incapacity to reason. Without doubt there exist some distinguished women, very superior to the average man, but they are as exceptional as the birth of any monstrosity, as, for example, of a gorilla with two heads; consequently, we may neglect them entirely. -- Gustave Le Bon There's more to 'the weird fetish about "biology" on both sides of the debate' than just wishing a better society into existence. There's a bias that feeds on deep cultural history that must be shed light onto and overcome.