
doi: 10.5334/opt.040813
This article is a response to both a Letter to the Editor by Dr Ambily Banerjee (Banerjee, 2007) and the recent UCL Gender Equality Event. Dr Banerjee claimed to be ‘astounded’ to find a ‘glass ceiling’ (sic) within her own discipline, Anatomy. She concludes her letter with, ‘I have never believed motherhood is a valid excuse for not realising one’s potential’. Both points are wrongheaded, and are the result of bogus feminist thinking. Firstly, men and women are different; and secondly, we have evolved ‘as if’ reproduction is the sole goal for which human beings were ‘designed’ and everything else is a means to that end. Feminism not only harms men, but harms women like Dr Banerjee, too (Quest, 1994; Sommers, 1995). Indeed, women are less happy today than they were in the 1970s and ‘the changes brought about through the women’s movement may have decreased women’s happiness’ (Stevenson and Wolfers, 2007).
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
