Evolutionary Psychology Bingo

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_8etu8odxpgo/S7q2Qj8q0qI/AAAAAAAABiU/gdyuxAo2Sxg/s1600/evopsychbingo.jpg

That is all.

The middle space should instead be "never cites actual hard science sources" instead of invoking virgin shaming ("is a male undergrad" could be used alone as well, I suppose).

I like the idea of bringing awareness to virgin shaming, but here it seems like a leap. Someone that fails at procuring encounters with women is surely not the same as "virgin". I would think virgin shaming meant that if someone is a virgin it reflects poorly on them, and the presumption that they have tried and must have tried and must keep trying.

But it seems pretty apparent that opposite sex frustration, these guys not getting what they want plays a role in this dreamt up nonsense evolutionary justifications for sexism. I don't see this leap into virgin shaming.

That BINGO card had me loling. The first thing I saw was "Reference to Pinker", and I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything, would have been a spit take. LOL. Loved that.

I don't see it as "virgin" but I don't think it's a fair cop to all the undergrads who can't get laid.

But the flip side is... they have to mention it, which seems moderately dispositive, esp. in situations where they are explaining how evpsych explains why it is they can't get laid.

What they think they can do about it; given the deterministic nature of evpsych is another question altogether.

Well, it's a free space, which implies that all evopsych people are male undergrads who can't get laid, which does seem virgin-shame-y.

The rest had me lol'ing my ass off, though. So true! I want to play it with Heartiste/Roissy's blog next time he goes all evopsych.

I think it's more problematic; it seems to imply rather that all male undergrads who can't get laid are evpsych devotees.

The Pinker reference made me do a spit take.