Wilson, <i>Sociobiology</i>, and Feminism

When Wilson's blockbuster Sociobiology appeared in 1975, feminist critics were quick to take issue with what they perceived to be its pervasive sexism.The book bifurcated animal behavior and human nature by gender, an assumption that was questioned and challenged by a group of women scientists calling themselves the "Genes and Gender Collective."The publication of Wilson's book was not the first opportunity that feminist critics had to point out the misogyny of the sciences of animal behavior and human nature.The popular ethology of the preceding decade-the writings of Robert Ardrey, Desmond Morris, and Lionel Tiger, among others-had also been subject to feminist criticism from women scientists, including most trenchantly from psychologist Naomi Weisstein in her 1968 piece "Psychology Constructs the Female." 1 In reply, Tiger, a biological anthropologist and Wilson's friend, had published a rebuttal in the New York Times in 1970, arguing that if male dominance existed in politics and culture, it was not men's fault: it was just a fact of nature. 2 But the criticism of Wilson's book differed from this earlier round of charge and countercharge in two important ways.First, the women scientists in the mid-1970s were organized in a way that the critics of the preceding decade had not been.While the earlier critics had written mainly as individuals, the 1970s feminists joined together, held conferences, published edited volumes, and tried to present a united front.The clearest example is the Genes and Gender