This is an uphill slog because Darwin is the King of the Hill.

There is no getting around social eugenics. Homo Progenitor does not find his equal attractive. He finds his complement attractive. Whatever the true state of affairs, our genetically determined sexual antennae are calibrated on the assumption that our competences are genetically mediated. That means that our kids have a decent shot at our own talents already, so the smart mating play is to couple with someone who has different competences. Thus, a woman doing a man’s job must deal with a reaction not too different from, and probably attributable to the same genetic cause, as the so-called “uncanny valley.”

One gets the same idea looking at Mayor Pete and his husband on the cover of a magazine. They are entitled to live their lives and love their loves, but their image screams to our genes “This won’t make healthy babies,” because the couple won’t make babies at all. Unfortunately, our wiring translates that genetic defense as “ickiness.”

Much of civilization is about overcoming natural urges, so I don’t want to be accused of saying that because something is “natural,” it’s ok. What I am saying is that it is natural, and it is deep-seated, which is why changing men’s attitudes is going to take an investment in re-training so great that maybe it isn’t worth the doing. The two-earner couple is a lousy business model to begin with. The mating implications are just icing on the shitty cake. Either way, though, gender-deniers need to know what they are up against.