And I say "Horsepuckie." I also say that I love a good metaphor; it can achieve greatness in explaining even seeming opposites, especially when it is developed to full allegorical glory.
So first, we have the allegory of the thrift store gatherer. She (she has to be female according to the evolutionary psychology people) is driven by evolutionary imperatives to shop, to browse and select the best goods for the best price. She wanders through the store, looking for the best deals, much as she has been window-shopping for the best shops. She gathers her soon-to-be purchases, just as a female in Paleolithic times gathered nuts and berries, with a discerning eye for value.
Doesn't that sound nice? The good female shopper gathering goods according to her gendered, evolutionary role.
So now let's try the allegory of the hunter in the thrift store. She (stepping outside her usual prescriptive role) is hunting for treasure, that genuine Prada bag for $5, the one hanging in the midst of the other less desirable bags. Before every sortie to the store, she plans her attack, her route, and her strategy. She knows that other hunters are looking for the same prey, so she uses special tactics to camouflage her approach. She cuts off access to several bags, including her intended prey, which gives her time to assess the situation. Assured that the prey is genuine, she isolates it from the rest and finalizes the purchase.That's the trouble with so many of the assumptions of evolutionary psychology. We mostly don't really know the difference between an evolutionary imperative and a damn good story that simply illustrates the status quo, especially in matters of gender.
