I like how you put 'evolutionary psychology' and 'scientific' in the same sentence as if they are at all related. Few modern fields are more full of baseless speculation and supposition, lack falsifiability, etc.
Layfolk coming up with just-so stories to justify what they want to be true are very, very different from actual scientists doing actual research on actual falsifiable hypotheses in actual evolutionary psychology. Don't let the former fool you into thinking the latter doesn't exist.
Not very different, from my perspective as a biologist. Evolutionary psychology is largely about assuming adaptive causes for things you don't bother to do any genetics to confirm. Why are other people killing themselves to prove genetic associations when you can apparently do "science" just by assuming there must be a genetic underpinning to any phenomenon you fancy?
First, it's irrelevant to my point whether evolutionary psychology is not a hard science.
When someone ignores, prohibits or shame a field using name-calling and fallacious axioms, arguments/debates are irrelevant and you have to run.
Secondly, what you've described is a problem in the social sciences not exclusive to evolutionary psychology. Some economic theories, for example, are largely debatable and, for some scholars, full of baseless speculation.
