The red queen Book

Coming out of pre-veterinary medicine and a slew of genetics classes, I can say that nothing in this book is particularly mind-blowing... except the hubris. The author has drawn up a laundry list of assumptions about all of humanity and left out a good deal of its subjects. As a scientist or, at the very least, as a lover of science... the references were interesting enough to keep me reading. But as someone with sexual awareness, a hesitancy to polarize gender and sexuality, and my own idea of what a woman might think or want... this was a very difficult book to swallow. In fact, it's akin to dry Kool-Aid.

If you are satisfied with the hetero-normative, monogamous, anglo, male-dominated definitions of sex and partnership (and if you are going to read this book as popular literature rather than as complete and well-founded scientific conjecture) go right ahead. It's a fun book.

But if you are someone who is easily irritated by flawed logic and narrow surveys used to prop up wobbly theorizing, skip it.

The good news is: Ridley doesn't care. As all great scientists do, he spent a good deal of time throwing his name in with philosophers, sociologists, and naturalists and saying that he, too, was capable of flaws. Just like them! Moreover, he expects a lot backlash from the less-thans who can't comprehend the magnitude of his reasoning. So go ahead and say that you don't like his book. Ridley is one step ahead of you. He knows you're coming; you predictable sap.

Despite that lovely manipulation, I still didn't like it. It gets two stars for all of the awesome material his book used (badly) and referenced.