Let's not get get the "militantly chauvinistic women" like
Andrea Dworkin mixed up with the boneheads who dreamed up the "
evolutionary psychology"
pseudoscience.
There was a book published recently about this:
A Natural History of Rape: The Biological Basis of Sexual Coercion, by
Randy Thornhill and
Craig Palmer. One of their conclusions seems to be (roughly speaking) that
men can't help raping women who wear revealing clothes, so women should dress more modestly.
Blaming women for being raped isn't exactly
feminism, is it? The difference is between "men can't help it so they should be locked up" on the one hand, and on the other hand "men can't help it so
women should be locked up", to put it crudely. Both are a bit goofy if you ask me.
Yes, there is an odd parallel with
Dworkin here, but here's a line from the
Salon review
URL'd below: "The authors are aware of the parallel and it seems to unsettle them,
feminists in general being a group they despise." (Emphasis mine).
Here's a woman in
Salon discussing the above book:
http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2000/02/29/rape/index.html
One should probably read the book before reaching any conclusions about it. The "
evolutionary psychology" book, I mean. Obviously, nobody's going to read
Dworkin before criticizing her.