Why do women do it to each other?

Are you kidding? Have you ever witnessed the abuse teen boys put each other through? Sometimes in disgusting ways. Teenagers' brains aren't cooked yet, they're all psychos, regardless of gender.

Stop it. You're going to make *my* panties wet.

Stop it. You're going to make *my* panties wet.

Like painfully so.

As in, you didn't even get that the Rumi quote was about our universes of discourse.

In terms of our talk, I'm not saying one thing is morally more correct than the other (nuclear family treated better or worse than strangers, and how that is evidence of certain concepts in evolutionary biology)... I am saying that scientists themselves immerse their interpretations and the value they give to observations based upon their own cultural assumptions.

I'm not talking about morality here. I am talking about intellectual honesty that takes into account even the very cultures of the scientists producing the studies and how those cultures impact the study.

You are still approaching this backwards. The idea that behaviors are products of selection is not derived from observing behaviors and then producing a model to attempt to explain the observed behaviors. It comes from the bottom up. Embryo development in multicellular animals is controlled by genes, the initial brain "structure" (and in humans much of its further development after birth) is a product of those genes (cell divisions, specialization, neuron connections, etc) and the behavior patterns of animals including human beings is then predisposed by those "structures." (Where else do you think your behavior comes from? If you don't think it's generated inside your brain then by all means demonstrate this by going under general anesthesia and choosing not to lose consciousness.

This is not just a hypothesis and it is not based on observations of any particular behaviors. It is not subject to cultural or perceptual biases any more than mathematics or Mendelian genetics or planetary motion would be. Evolutionary algorithms are also not hypothetical, and one clearly applies to genes and their phenotypes (in this case behaviors) being exposed to selection.

Particular hypotheses about what should be considered "a behavior" and whether they might be controlled by which genes in which ways, are what would be exposed to cultural biases and perceptions, etc. That doesn't invalidate the above.

Since you seem to be arguing generalities instead of specifics of anything, I'm guessing this stuff may be a little more technical than your current knowledgebase, which is fine. I have spent an inordinate amount of time programming evolutionary algorithms for fun, as well as neural networks for fun, and I also happen to be well versed in Mendelian genetics which I've taught to thousands of people for fun. That is why this subject was so interesting to me... several things I enjoy and know quite well all converge on this topic. What an awesome bonus to find out that my nerdy pursuits and passions have turned me into a woman-hating rape-condoning homophobic sexist racist eugenicist bent on world domination.

I also have a huge problem when this sort of intellectually dishonest thinking becomes a reason for us to sit around and say **** like "men are naturally inclined to rape."

Now you're quote mining. I didn't say that. Face it, you're just mad at a book you disagreed with. I didn't write that book. Tell it to the authors because I don't really care what they wrote or why.