If you'll note, I didn't trash on his work, I think it has a lot of value. My problem was his characterization of feminism as not having talked about these things and therefore implying they are a bunch of boobs. [edit] What is the cause of this system? What ideology is sustaining it? Is it on the whole good or bad? Normative description is not enough for many feminists, who have identified it as a problem and want to change it. It may be enough for him for his work, so that's a pretty significant difference.
The cause is biology, he explains it in the speech/book. It's actually pretty simple to understand - men are expendable because sperm is cheap. Wombs are a limited resource, sperm isn't. (In a nutshell).
I think feminism having a theory doesn't amount to much in itself. Religion also has a theory that "explains" the world. But it isn't science. Neither is feminism (in most cases).
I'm also amused because of course it is in the women's power to change men's behavior - simply change who they mate with. If they prefer mating with the most powerful men, men will compete to be the most powerful men. It's not the patriarchy creating that, it's women's choices. (Although it's possible that women's choices make biological sense, but I've never seen a feminist who cared much for evolution theory).
Another interesting thought which I think is from Nassim Taleb: religions did a lot for peace by mandating monogamy and making sure more men got access to a womb that way.
Got it. My bad. I improperly combined your comment with the criticisms of Baumeister I read that disagreed with him but didn't say why. Sorry about that.
By the way, I meant normative means they want to change it, whereas positivist would be merely describing a system. Baumeister seems more positivist.
I definitely agree that Baumeister didn't engage with feminist talk on this issue. I think he was responding to public discourses on issues like wage gaps, which don't necessarily correspond to more nuanced feminist narratives.
I wasn't clear enough separating his useful work from his feelings on feminism, and my initial post was vitriolic toward him. I can do better next time.
