Males are like cuckoos. Yes they are. There is a lot to be learnt about cuckoos.
First, the brood parasitism (nicked from Diki)
About 56 of the Old World species and 3 of the New World species are brood parasites, laying their eggs in the nests of other birds. These species are obligate brood parasites, meaning that they only reproduce in this fashion. In addition to the above noted species, yet others sometimes engage in non-obligate brood parasitism, laying their eggs in the nests of members of their own species in addition to raising their own young. The best-known example is the European Common Cuckoo. The shells of the eggs of brood-parasites is usually thick. They have two distinct layers with an outer chalky layer that is believed to provide resistance to cracking when the eggs are dropped in the host nest. The cuckoo egg hatches earlier than the host’s, and the cuckoo chick grows faster; in most cases the chick evicts the eggs or young of the host species. The chick has no time to learn this behavior, so it must be an instinct passed on genetically. The chick encourages the host to keep pace with its high growth rate with its rapid begging call and the chick’s open mouth which serves as a sign stimulus.
Female parasitic cuckoos specialize and lay eggs that closely resemble the eggs of their chosen host. This has been produced by natural selection, as some birds are able to distinguish cuckoo eggs from their own, leading to those eggs least like the host’s being thrown out of the nest. Host species may engage in more direct action to prevent cuckoos laying eggs in their nest in the first place – birds whose nests are at high risk of cuckoo-contamination are known to mob cuckoos to drive them out of the area. Parasitic cuckoos are grouped into gentes, with each gens specializing in a particular host. There is some evidence that the gentes are genetically different from one another. Host specificity is enhanced by the need to imitate the eggs of the host.
Wot Dave? How Dave?
Well think about it. How much time and effort do males put in into raising ‘their sons’? Very little, they get some woman to do it usually. She puts all that time and effort into raising this (male) cuckoo chick, and at the end of it, she has raised the next generation of patriarchs that will rape, terrorise and dominate other females. Unknowingly, she is contributing towards the oppression of her figurative ‘sisters and daughters’.
The mother of son(s) is given higher status than mothers of girls-only, just as all male children are routinely given preference over female children throughout their childhood, one obvious example is the importance placed on boys’ schooling, regarded as ‘important’ and girls’ schooling is regarded as much less important. In some areas of the world, girls are not even regarded as important enough to go to school (watch that video, it is fantastic). Giving mothers of boys higher status within patriarchy is a neat trick so that they make sure they put even more effort into raising boys. In places like China, with the one child policy, girls are aborted or abandoned to raise boys. This is putting far more of the mothering/parenting effort into the raising of boys.
At school or at home (the ‘nest’) boys are usually larger, and squawk louder for attention, ensuring they get more resources and attention devoted to them. See Dale Spender’s book, Invisible Women.
When they grow up, they generally don’t care if they impregnate women or not, whether consensually or via rape, they are fairly assured that the woman will be stuck with the problem of raising their kid (a better than 50% chance it will be male), and they know that society will punish that woman if she fails to deliver being “a good mother”. Rarely does any focus befall him as a “deadbeat dad”. Again, very cuckoo-like behaviour, relying on ‘someone else’ to raise and nurture your genetic offspring. Why else would some of these dudes ‘protest’ that the female they impregnated had the ‘nerve’ to ‘kill his unborn child’?
Sometimes they stick around for a few years, or ten even, to make sure the mother is bonded with the kid. He might be forced to pay something in child maintenance, but it is usually not nearly enough. He is certainly getting more childraising services than he is paying for. The level of involvement is generally up to him to decide, sometimes he chooses a lot, so that he can teach the child (usually a boy) the ways of patriarchy and misogyny.
And of course, that age-old practise whereby they cuckold another male. That again is getting someone else to raise your genetic sprog.
OK Dave, you made your point, but that post wasn’t terribly twanzphobic now was it?
I am sure I can work a bit of twanzphobia into the mix to appease my readers.
M2Ts are now currently suing organisations for discrimination, usually via sex discrimination laws that were fought for, and won by, females – to counter the many centuries discrimination the female-born have faced. That is riding on the back of what another group fought/worked for. Additionally they are trying to get more legislation in their favour, and those ‘rights’ are primarily at the expense of born-females. This is certainly the equivalent of pushing the other ‘chicks’ out of the legislative ‘nest’.
The M2T who takes the actual physical labours of a female, in usurping the biological motherhood role. The actual female who gave birth to the child sits by as the usurper gets all the fuss from the hospital staff as if he was the actual birthing mother. Meanwhile, it appears that the postpartum medical concern for the biological mother is fairly ignored. The reason for medical staff to pay attention to the birthing mother is because her body has just been through a fairly huge, taxing, and potentially fatal event. And dudes, huffing and puffing for all of five minutes to despatch a few tadpoles is hardly the same.
As feminists, or rather ‘twanzfeminists’, the M2Ts squawk the loudest as ‘the most deserving of all females to get rights’. Ignoring the plight of the majority of the actual female population. Their ‘rights’ are regarded as far more important and far more urgent, than the female-born. Once again, we are shoved out of the legislative ‘nest’.
All around, males are fairly cuckoo-like. No matter what feathers they wear.