Can we just stop with the reductive, pseudo-scientific bullcrap about gender differences?
Now we have an entire generation of women thinking the reason they like to shop, shop, shop is because they are biologically wired to hunt for berries and that it has nothing to do with the power of marketing and inherited gender roles. The problem with this study, as most of the letter writers were smart enough to realize, is that it sets out to prove something we already realized would be true–that women like pink more than men–and comes up with an experiment to prove it. But since we already knew adult women would like pink, proving that it’s true is not the interesting part. The interesting part would be *why* this is so, but their “evolutionary” explanation for why has nothing at all to do with the study, and is not supported–and probably could not be supported–by any evidence whatsoever. These kinds of phony evolutionary explanations are usually there just to support the status quo and make people think their gender roles are fixed and unchangeable. Although in this case it i
