I was struck by a few things when I saw this headline from The Guardian.

Obviously, one of them was the author Cat Bohannon's suggestion that men should literally get emasculated, but also by the fact that the author refers to herself and all her biographies note that she is a Columbia Ph.D.

A few refer to her as a scientist, but none tell you exactly what she has a Ph.D. in. Not one. Not on her own bio, nor in any of the many I have found. Even her bio at Columbia omits this little detail. 

Democrat men are immortal. https://t.co/6x631MmtQ6

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) June 2, 2024

We are told that she studied "the evolution of narrative and cognition." I also learned that she has a Master's in Fine Arts in creative nonfiction, suggesting that we are not talking about a biologist here. "Narrative is another clue. It is a buzzword with which you are very familiar by now. 

Now I don't believe that only "scientists" can talk intelligently about science--that would be both wrong and hypocritical, both because I often talk about science and many scientists don't talk intelligently about the subject--but it is a clue that perhaps she might have a "creative" reason for suggesting that men get castrated. 

Her recently published book, "Eve," is another clue. It is all about how women have driven evolution, which is obviously true, although a bit incomplete given that sexual reproduction takes two sexes, and the genes that get passed on are, as far as I know, not exclusively those of the female. Whatever "female" means these days. 

What is a woman, anyway? Will I live longer if I wear a dress, or does biology suddenly mean something again? I get confused. Bohannon is clear that the biology of women "from tits to toes" drives evolution, but she also maintains that "trans women are women." I wonder if that is only true with castration, or is it a mental state as we often hear?

As I said, she is all about the Narrative™, not biology. 

In a review of Eve from last year, The Guardian described her and her book this way:

 Eve is a hugely ambitious piece of work, and one that doesn’t pull its punches. It took Bohannon 10 years to research and write – though, to be fair, that was at the same time as earning a PhD, living through a pandemic and having two children. The book sets out to turn our male-centric understanding of the human body, and history, on its head. Bohannon creates female characters out of our earliest common ancestors, and rewrites the opening scene of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, to argue that perhaps it was women who led the development of language, tools and walking on two legs.

Moving between evolutionary biology, physiology, paleoanthropology and genetics, from the Jurassic period to the most cutting-edge scientific research, this page-turning history of the human mammal describes seven main characters: our ancestral “Eves”, as Bohannon calls them. In the beginning, there was “Morgie” (Morganucodon), an egg-laying cross between a weasel and a mouse that was probably the first creature to lactate. More than 200m years later, Morgie’s breastfeeding descendants are so sophisticated that a mother’s body can change the composition of its milk in response to hormonal messages in the baby’s saliva.

Character and storytelling are clearly second nature to Bohannon. She was born in Atlanta, Georgia; her father was a psychology professor at Emory University, her mother a pianist. “My puberty years were spent helping to prep slides for my father’s experiments,” she says. “I was a subject long before I was a researcher.” She skipped ahead a couple of years in school, dropped out, played in bands and went to the University of East Anglia to study poetry under Andrew Motion. Then she took an MFA at Columbia in creative nonfiction, and her PhD was in the evolution of narrative and cognition.

Bohannon is obviously no idiot, although she has an annoying habit (as do the people describing her) of slyly suggesting that her work is less about storytelling and more about science and also that she is a certified Ph.D. scientist. She is not. Her talent and specialty is in telling stories. 

She is a narrative producer, and her narrative is that men are defective and subordinate to women in importance. Men are surplus to need when it comes to life and evolution. 

I happen to have this radical idea that men and women are complementary, both necessary to the current and past of human beings and our evolution. This is not a popular view these days, and the suggestion that men get castrated carries not merely biological weight but also psychological and especially ideological significance. 

Ever heard of alphabet ideology, anyone? They are, quite literally, pushing for the castration of children and its normality. By all means, get rid of what Bohannon calls "death nuggets" kiddos. Your blue-haired Queer she/they/furry can refer you to a doctor for precisely this procedure without even telling your parents these days. 

Whether it is the fountain of youth or the elixir of life, men have travelled the world looking for the key to increasing their longevity.

They should be looking a bit closer to home, according to one leading researcher – although after they do, they might end up taking the years God intended for them.

When it comes to increasing the lifespan of any male mammal, “there is one way you can intervene”: castration.

Cat Bohannon, the celebrated author of Eve: How the Female Body Drove 200 Million Years of Human Evolution, said men went through life “smuggling two little death nuggets”, with research suggesting an orchiectomy can lend a few more precious years.

Perhaps we should perform this experiment on any Leftist over 20. However, I suspect that injecting the test subjects with female hormones would alter the outcomes. 

I do wonder what universal castration would do to the "evolution" of the human race; I doubt it would be good, but at least Kat can test her theory that women drive it rather than the complementarity of the sexes. 

One of the myths that she pushes, and that myth has been pushed by august publications including Scientific American, is that the female of the species has been ignored by scientists. Scientific American even claimed, both in print and in videos, that up until the 19th century, neither science nor men recognized the existence of the female sex. 

Before the late 18th century, Western science recognized only one sex—the male—and considered the female body an inferior version of it. The shift historians call the “two-sex model” served mainly to reinforce gender and racial divisions by tying social status to the body. (6/7) pic.twitter.com/x8KZ5rEaeW

— Scientific American (@sciam) August 24, 2022

It is a wonder we ever reproduced. How did we ever discover the "bonus hole," as they now call female genitalia? I am pretty sure that all those young men looking for sex had a pretty clear idea of who they were aiming to bed down with. 

It shouldn't surprise us that an author published in a leftist newspaper uses the term "death nuggets" to describe testes, where sperm are produced. This type of thinking is typical of the ideology that pushes the reduction in human population, euthanasia (why get rid of your testes if you should off yourself? To stop reproduction, obviously), and "degrowth." Living longer is the teaser to make it seem desirable; euthanasia comes much later, I suppose. 

My critique of this line of thought is not especially aimed at Bohannon. She seems to be doing well out of echoing the ideological line preferred by the Left, and one more radical feminist pushing this line of thought makes little difference. 

No, it's the line of thought itself that is poisonous. Talking up the advantages of castration is about as on-brand for this poisonous ideology as you can be, and it isn't really aimed at anyone who isn't steeped in radical Queer ideology already; and the radical Queers aren't coming for us. 

They are coming for the kids.