Bruce J. Ellis and co-authors present a two-tier theory to explain how different forms of extrinsic mortality affect life histories. In essence, it can be said that the more severe the living conditions as measured by exposure to forms of extrinsic mortality, the faster the life histories manifested by faster and/or earlier reproduction. However, the authors note that various forms of extrinsic mortality can have countervailing effects on life history strategies. Bruce J. Ellis and colleagues also emphasize that they do not refer to the experiences of rich populations, which are not relevant to testing evolutionary hypotheses. It is the latter context that I wanted to address in my article, pointing out references to feminism. Feminism has developed as a philosophy and ethics in rich societies (especially the US and Western Europe). However, not every rich society has developed, or at least minimally applied, feminist ideas. In turn, not every rich country, which is additionally the home and cradle of feminist ideas, has a low fertility rate. The fertility rate in France (1.9) and the US (1.84), the homelands of feminism, is much higher than in Poland (1.32) (The World Factbook, n.d.), infamous for its highly restrictive anti-abortion laws and with decidedly unestablished feminist traditions (Błuś, Reference Błuś2024). In my article, I want to analyze how feminism, which emphasizes women’s subjectivity and at the same time exposes and criticizes injustice and inequality and the reduction of women to reproductive functions, can be related to the topic of life history strategies discussed in Ellis and colleagues’ research. Does exposure to the manifestation of extrinsic mortality always have to imply faster life history strategies, and how does this connect with feminism’s rightful exposure to women’s subjectivity and criticism of the reduction of women to reproductive functions only?
Life history theory is about reproduction. Reproduction affects women in a special way, not only biologically but also socially, culturally, and politically. It affects women in a particularly negative and harmful way (Beauvoir de, Reference Beauvoir1971). An objective genderless outsider observing human history could probably form the conclusion that slower life history strategies are more beneficial to women bearing the burden of reproduction. This conclusion was reached by feminism, which made the essence of its philosophy and ethics, as well as the main demand of its political program, the liberation of women from the yoke of reproductive oppression (Firestone, Reference Firestone1971).
The moral goal of society should be to slow down life history strategies since this slowdown is a necessary condition for establishing equality, especially equal and full access for women to the public sphere. Gender equality under fast life history strategies is not possible because women bear the main burden of reproduction, as well as the maintenance of offspring and the family in general (Battin, Reference Battin2024). It is primarily women who bear the burden of the food supply. Striving to eliminate the causes of external mortality should be one of the main aspirations of societies, and it is, at least to some extent. Societies strive to fight disease and food shortage. But combating other factors of external mortality, such as war, domestic violence, and social violence, is problematic and is the privilege of only some societies. Wars are the domain of many less developed and poorer societies and are often the result of past colonial policies and current exploitation by the superpowers. Domestic violence and the low status of women are a reality in many countries, and there is a lack of any mechanisms that could at least partially reduce violence and increase the status of women.
How can feminism function in this landscape of fast life history strategies driven in part by the aforementioned extrinsic mortality factors? At the outset, it is worth emphasizing that feminism has a genuine power to make things happen. Feminism is one of the exceptions where moral values can change the dominant principles. Feminist values, against the principles of patriarchy and sexism, were able to be introduced quite quickly in Western countries, despite the fact that they still encounter resistance today. Various types of pronatalist policies still dominate the world and involve the subjugation of women (Togman, Reference Togman2019). Although not so advertised, feminist values in practice advocated replacing fast life history strategies with slow ones because in both of them the main carrier of these strategies is women as reproducers. The value of feminism rooted in culture in the sense that feminism has taken root in the culture and consciousness of the US, United Kingdom, or France is that it at least shows alternative life history strategies and criticizes the unreflective choice of fast life history strategies. Also in these countries – the cradles of feminism, fast life history strategies are present, but neither are they dominant nor considered the default model.
Paradoxes are also possible. The extremely politically powerful role of religion in Poland, influencing legislation through the de facto near-ban on abortion and the inability to enter into even heterosexual partnerships (with a total lack of rights for sexual minorities), has led to one of the lowest fertility rates in the world. Despite the lack of a well-established feminist tradition in Poland – abortion rights were abruptly introduced by the communist regime and just as abruptly taken away by the church-nationalist regime after the fall of communism (Mishtal, Reference Mishtal2015) – in Poland, as in other Western countries, more and more women are choosing to become mothers at a later age. This is undoubtedly the result of practical feminism, which manifests itself in ignoring the expectations of women traditionally formulated by the main pillars of patriarchy, namely the Church and the political parties of the right and center.
In conclusion, feminism should be one of the central slogans, along with climate protection and sustainable development, of the global social and political movement. Developed countries in the West, the cradles of feminism, have a moral obligation to cultivate feminism where both poor conditions in the form of numerous causes of extrinsic mortality and the mechanisms of patriarchy and sexism promote fast life history strategies.
Bruce J. Ellis and co-authors present a two-tier theory to explain how different forms of extrinsic mortality affect life histories. In essence, it can be said that the more severe the living conditions as measured by exposure to forms of extrinsic mortality, the faster the life histories manifested by faster and/or earlier reproduction. However, the authors note that various forms of extrinsic mortality can have countervailing effects on life history strategies. Bruce J. Ellis and colleagues also emphasize that they do not refer to the experiences of rich populations, which are not relevant to testing evolutionary hypotheses. It is the latter context that I wanted to address in my article, pointing out references to feminism. Feminism has developed as a philosophy and ethics in rich societies (especially the US and Western Europe). However, not every rich society has developed, or at least minimally applied, feminist ideas. In turn, not every rich country, which is additionally the home and cradle of feminist ideas, has a low fertility rate. The fertility rate in France (1.9) and the US (1.84), the homelands of feminism, is much higher than in Poland (1.32) (The World Factbook, n.d.), infamous for its highly restrictive anti-abortion laws and with decidedly unestablished feminist traditions (Błuś, Reference Błuś2024). In my article, I want to analyze how feminism, which emphasizes women’s subjectivity and at the same time exposes and criticizes injustice and inequality and the reduction of women to reproductive functions, can be related to the topic of life history strategies discussed in Ellis and colleagues’ research. Does exposure to the manifestation of extrinsic mortality always have to imply faster life history strategies, and how does this connect with feminism’s rightful exposure to women’s subjectivity and criticism of the reduction of women to reproductive functions only?
Life history theory is about reproduction. Reproduction affects women in a special way, not only biologically but also socially, culturally, and politically. It affects women in a particularly negative and harmful way (Beauvoir de, Reference Beauvoir1971). An objective genderless outsider observing human history could probably form the conclusion that slower life history strategies are more beneficial to women bearing the burden of reproduction. This conclusion was reached by feminism, which made the essence of its philosophy and ethics, as well as the main demand of its political program, the liberation of women from the yoke of reproductive oppression (Firestone, Reference Firestone1971).
The moral goal of society should be to slow down life history strategies since this slowdown is a necessary condition for establishing equality, especially equal and full access for women to the public sphere. Gender equality under fast life history strategies is not possible because women bear the main burden of reproduction, as well as the maintenance of offspring and the family in general (Battin, Reference Battin2024). It is primarily women who bear the burden of the food supply. Striving to eliminate the causes of external mortality should be one of the main aspirations of societies, and it is, at least to some extent. Societies strive to fight disease and food shortage. But combating other factors of external mortality, such as war, domestic violence, and social violence, is problematic and is the privilege of only some societies. Wars are the domain of many less developed and poorer societies and are often the result of past colonial policies and current exploitation by the superpowers. Domestic violence and the low status of women are a reality in many countries, and there is a lack of any mechanisms that could at least partially reduce violence and increase the status of women.
How can feminism function in this landscape of fast life history strategies driven in part by the aforementioned extrinsic mortality factors? At the outset, it is worth emphasizing that feminism has a genuine power to make things happen. Feminism is one of the exceptions where moral values can change the dominant principles. Feminist values, against the principles of patriarchy and sexism, were able to be introduced quite quickly in Western countries, despite the fact that they still encounter resistance today. Various types of pronatalist policies still dominate the world and involve the subjugation of women (Togman, Reference Togman2019). Although not so advertised, feminist values in practice advocated replacing fast life history strategies with slow ones because in both of them the main carrier of these strategies is women as reproducers. The value of feminism rooted in culture in the sense that feminism has taken root in the culture and consciousness of the US, United Kingdom, or France is that it at least shows alternative life history strategies and criticizes the unreflective choice of fast life history strategies. Also in these countries – the cradles of feminism, fast life history strategies are present, but neither are they dominant nor considered the default model.
Paradoxes are also possible. The extremely politically powerful role of religion in Poland, influencing legislation through the de facto near-ban on abortion and the inability to enter into even heterosexual partnerships (with a total lack of rights for sexual minorities), has led to one of the lowest fertility rates in the world. Despite the lack of a well-established feminist tradition in Poland – abortion rights were abruptly introduced by the communist regime and just as abruptly taken away by the church-nationalist regime after the fall of communism (Mishtal, Reference Mishtal2015) – in Poland, as in other Western countries, more and more women are choosing to become mothers at a later age. This is undoubtedly the result of practical feminism, which manifests itself in ignoring the expectations of women traditionally formulated by the main pillars of patriarchy, namely the Church and the political parties of the right and center.
In conclusion, feminism should be one of the central slogans, along with climate protection and sustainable development, of the global social and political movement. Developed countries in the West, the cradles of feminism, have a moral obligation to cultivate feminism where both poor conditions in the form of numerous causes of extrinsic mortality and the mechanisms of patriarchy and sexism promote fast life history strategies.
Financial support
This work was supported by the National Science Centre, Poland (UMO-2024/53/B/HS1/01295).
Competing interests
None.