Tags

, , , , , , ,

Rollo Tomassi thinks that eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap; therefore, women have more sexual value than men.  But is this really the case?

Surely, a woman has a limit on potential offspring.  A man, not so much.  Hence, his equipment has more value because it potentially can generate more fruit.

Let’s consider siring fees.  A horse breeder might pay thousands of dollars for semen from a champion horse.  But there’s no market in eggs.

Let’s consider an environment where law doesn’t exist.  In such an environment, a man could rape women without fear of legal repercussions.  He has the muscles, so he can impose his will.  It’s merely fear of legal repercussions that often keeps rape from occurring.  The infrequency of rape helps to keep the value of eggs high.  Anti-rape laws exist to artificially keep the value of eggs high.  The Feminine Imperative promotes anti-rape laws and seeks to keep the value of eggs high.  However, biologically-speaking, eggs are an abundant commodity; not as abundant as sperm, but more easily accessible because of the greater strength of men.  If a woman wants a child, she will have to convince a man to get her pregnant and perhaps help raise the child.  This often required a dowry.  A woman’s family spent resources so that she might breed.

The view that eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap is merely a continuation of the policies of the Feminine Imperative.