Good evening, ladies and gentlemen! As I promised in “Should We Ban Gauguin?” article, together with our experts I want to discuss the issue of gender relationships. Alas, I decided to raise this topic not because of my curiosity or academic interest, but because of the acuity of the topic that I, as a man, husband, son, brother and father, am worried about.
All of us, of course, are aware of the tsunami of news about allegations of sexual harassment that the media is filled with for the past two years. Most of the allegations are related to the “alleged” unlawful violence of men against women; there are also (but quite rare) accusations of women who harass men as well as homosexual harassment. My personal opinion: if the police and the judiciary found him or her guilty (impartially!), then it is necessary to punish him or her very severely (by the way, I fully support Larry Nassar’s verdict, who was the former physician of US gymnastics team and raped young athletes for more than twenty years and who will spend the next 175 years in the prison). But what if the accused person is not guilty? Where is the presumption of innocence that should protect the suspected person, his оr her name and dignity before the court decision?
I lost my patience! I want to discuss the other side of this global problem. But first, let’s recall the classical tragicomic story. In William Thackeray’s Vanity Fair, the unfaithful spouse wants to meet her lover at her boudoir, in an intimate setting. But how she can be sure that her husband will not disturb them during the meeting? It was quite simple, taking into account that her husband had owed a large amount of money to borrowers. The tricky woman told the collectors where to find him, he was arrested, and the woman was free to spend the time with her lover. In the book, everything ends with an anecdotal return home of the loving spouse in the midst of an intimate party.
That is what happened in the good old Europe, one hundred and seventy years ago. However, modern “loving” spouses have the same ingenuity (or, probably they read the classic literature). Our modern reality gives them a win-win opportunity: a lady who wants to remove the barrier in the form of a husband just goes to the police and claims that her husband forced her to make love (unfortunately, in this situation, due to their physical strength, men are almost always in a bad starting position). Finally, the unfortunate (and, actually, innocent) spouse is in jail (of course, in accordance with the law!), and the lady is free for at least the next few months. Simultaneously, the man automatically (even before the trial) receives the unpleasant mark of a rapist (which will probably accompany him for the rest of his life), and the woman receives a noble and pitiful reputation of the hapless but brave victim, who found the strength to fight. Of course, everything is according to the law(!), the hapless victim is protected by the Law. The evil has been defeated, or on the contrary, openly and cynically laughs at all of us.
Do you think that this is a joke? Unfortunately, no! Do you know how many people have experienced this scenario? Do you know that starting from July 1, 2019, the law on compulsory consent to sexual relations (“Samtyckeslagen“) has been accepted in Sweden? Verbal consent of both sides is needed (why not a written one? And how do you prove it later?). Optionally, one have to clearly show his or her desire and will to participate in the sexual act (the same questions about evidence are arisen). Do you know that a similar law is under consideration by the new government in Finland? In the view of the active role of these Scandinavian countries in the European Union (for example, Finland has been the chairman of the EU Council since July 1, 2019), we logically expect the adoption of similar legislative initiatives in other European countries as well.
So, what should we do in order to avoid becoming a potential “rapists”? The most logical solution is a complete denial of intimate contacts… First, physical contacts (“no sexual contact” means “no fear to be persecuted on charges of sexual violence”); further, the denial of spiritual proximity (my friends, mental dependence and mental violence are no less serious crimes than the physical ones). If you want physical love, go to prostitutes. If you want to talk openly, heart to heart, share your fillings, go to a psychologist. If you want to work calmly – find or create a workplace free of women/men. By the way, in all the above variants there is no guarantee to not be blamed in any kind of sexual violence.
It is ridiculous and sad, but in fact everything on which the traditional family is built (love, trust, respect, mutual assistance, sex) will be finally criminalized. In other words, the idea of a traditional family with parents, grandparents and children, gradually turns into a dangerous utopia. Perhaps, if our society will realize this, we will change our moral priorities? Maybe ladies, wives, mothers, sisters will finally defend their relatives and beloved men? And maybe men will start to behave as gentlemen (with respect and dignity)?
There is no doubt – violence is one of the vilest crimes and it is necessary to punish the criminals with the full rigor of the law. While the offender will stay in jail for few years or pay a fine, the trauma caused by the rapist will haunt the victim forever. However, not only that the new laws will not stop potential criminals (especially with tightly packed wallets and with an army of lawyers behind them), but also give a legitimate basis to pseudo-victims to achieve their despicable goals. I think it makes no sense to dispute what is worse: sexual violence, or revenge, elimination of a competitor, blackmail. The result is the same: a morally and physically broken person and the ruined lives of many men and women (both the accused people and their relatives).
You know, I’m tired of being afraid for my family and friends (both men and women – because there are so many envious people and villains of both genders who will do everything to achieve their goals). I’m tired to be afraid of normal human relationships with colleagues! I’m tired to be afraid of saying compliments, presenting flowers, rejoicing in human beauty! Where has our society gone lost, how has human morality been perverted, if in response to these innocent acts (that are based on humanity and sincerity), we can easily get accused of sexism?
What is the way out of this situation? It can be quite simple and logical… Nevertheless, our civilization has never looked for easy ways. Paradoxically, many modern movements claim that the solution to the problem is the disappearance of gender differences. In fact, if we suddenly turn out to be a unisexual society, many social and psychological issues will be immediately solved. So, completing this long introduction, I want to ask our expertise: Has Nature created something similar? Moreover, is that possible for humanity to survive if we will be a single-sex society?
Leonid Livshits: Let’s start with your first question. In best of my knowledge, there is no species that are completely monogenderal. Biologically, the reason is quite understandable: the lack of genetic drift leads to species extinction. Even in those species in which there is no clear sex division into male and female individuals, individuals copulate either by exchanging or transmitting genetic material. So, androdioecious species have male and hermaphroditic individuals (for example, the roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans, beloved by biologists as a very nice biological model, reproduces primarily by self-fertilization, but infrequent out-crossing events occur), in gynodioecious species (some plant species, for example, the large blue lobelia Lobelia siphilitica) – female and hermaphroditic individuals; completely hermaphroditic species have numerous mechanisms that minimize the possibility of self-fertilization.
Another question: is it possible to create a mono-gender society, even despite the “genetic passport” of each individual? This question is much more complex, but, in general, the answer is “Yes!”
Sex determination is strictly genetic in nearly all mammals and birds, and purely environmental in, for example, many reptiles. However, in various taxa sex determination is neither purely genetic nor purely environmental. Therefore, it is more useful to see the phenotypic sex as the result of the three major drivers of phenotypic variation, namely the genetics, the environment and the development-associated randomality. It is then easy to see why disturbed environments can affect sex determination and sex ratios in populations. Such disturbances have genetic and demographic consequences that can sometimes threaten the viability of populations.
Many environmental factors can strongly affect sex determination in species. Numerous works have shown a complete sexual transition with the acquisition of full regenerative abilities in numerous species of plants, mollusks, crustaceans, fish, amphibians, reptiles and birds. Temperature is certainly the most key environmental factor that triggers male or female gonad development. Other factors affecting sex determination are photoperiod, social influences, pathogens, acidity or oxygen levels, micropollutants and numerous chemicals (e.g. estradiol, various types of polychlorinated biphenyls, atrazine herbicide). By the way, in connection with this, a local or global change in the environment (for example, power plants that increase the temperature of river water or cause chemical pollution) leads to an acute quantitative change in male/female ratio, and, as a result, an almost instantaneous decrease in progeny, with subsequent change in ecological relations related to these species.
At the moment, there is no scientific literature that show a similar (i.e., complete) sexual “switch” in mammals and, specifically, in humans. However, this does not mean the impossibility of such an effect. Moreover, hormonal and surgical interventions may at least cause and control the “desired” phenotypic changes. Therefore, the hypothetical answer to the question if an artificial mono-gender human society can be created (especially, if the reproduction will be carried out by genetic methods), then the answer is yes!
My question for our readers: do we really want such a society for our children? Clearly, that on the way to a mono-sexual human society, we will have to destroy dioecious plant and animal species (because they will not fit into the new psychology and perception of the world). Therefore, in addition to the first question, and the second: do we really dream of living in such an artificial world, where the human eat only chemical food (because there will be no real fruits, vegetables, fish and meat) and breathe synthesized oxygen (because forests will disappear)? Personally, I don’t want it.
Featured image by geralt from pixabay.