Using Science to Hate on Men

Using science/”science” to prove the inferiority of a particular group is nothing new (see: racism), so it’s no surprise it’s being done to show the supposed worthlessness of male humans.

Greg Hampikian, possibly a male, writes in the New York Times (naturally) that men are becoming “less relevant to both reproduction and parenting”.  Women, he says, are “both necessary and sufficient for reproduction, and men are neither.”  He then goes on to claim that a human life begins as an egg:

“Your life as an egg actually started in your mother’s developing ovary, before she was born; you were wrapped in your mother’s fetal body as it developed within your grandmother.”

Good God – where to start?

Anyone who knows anything about sexual reproduction, as opposed to asexual reproduction, knows this is complete bunk.

[Meanwhile, some libs are in a tizzy about Arizona’s new anti-abortion/pro-life law  because it begins counting pregnancy at ovulation, not conception, which does seem rather silly, even though, according to the Mayo Clinic, that is usually the starting point used to calculate a due date…  Still, that is not when life begins.  Egg + sperm = new human life.  I swear, I thought people who took biology knew this.  Mr. Hampikian, a professor of biology, must know this.]

I cannot understand why Mr. Hampikian initially ignores the role of sperm in creating babies, (My shot in the dark guess is some kind of “male guilt” for all the injustices  women have suffered, but I don’t know.  Maybe he’s just stupid.), and then comments on fertilization as a nearly irrelevant occurrence in the development of a new human:

“Then, at some point, your father spent a few minutes close by, but then left. A little while later, you encountered some very odd tiny cells that he had shed. They did not merge with you, or give you any cell membranes or nutrients — just an infinitesimally small packet of DNA, less than one-millionth of your mass.”

Apparently, size matters more than percentage: 50% of the zygote‘s chromosomes come from the sperm; the other 50% come from the egg.

I could go on, but the discounting of facts is not the biggest problem with this article (really).  The most disconcerting thing is Mr. Hampikian’s willingness to discount facts to support his point that men are not necessary.

On the contrary, Mr. Hampikian: men are necessary.  Males, of course, are necessary not only for reproduction, but also because they can become MEN.  If you have no appreciation for men, it’s probably because you aren’t one.  You would greatly benefit yourself and those around you by devoting yourself to understanding the distinction and working to become a man.

I recommend starting here: The Art of Manliness.  I don’t know them, and they don’t know me, but the folks at this blog can answer your question: “does ‘mankind’ really need men?”  Please take the advice offered there seriously: the world does not need another pathetic tool, and the women of the world would appreciate quite a bit more than “entertainment” from you, even though many of us are taught to expect nothing more.

Attempting to prove the uselessness of males does not make the world a better, more fair, place.  Quit asking us to disrespect you, and be someone worthy of respect, not a grovelling fool.

In short, man the fuck up.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: