Lynda Boothroyd
banner
drboothroyd.bsky.social
Lynda Boothroyd
@drboothroyd.bsky.social
Cross-cultural and experimental psychologist / anthropologist.
Working on: appearance ideals, body image, sexual selection, gender, social transmission.
Working in: 🇬🇧 🇨🇴 🇳🇮🇲🇽 🇿🇼 🇨🇳
(A veces posteo en español.)
Prof @ Durham
http://www.boothlab.org
Yay!
November 10, 2025 at 5:11 PM
That's so lovely to know. It's always hard to determine if someone who seems lovely on brief interactions is a good egg in the rest of their life, but Annette always gave me good vibes.
November 10, 2025 at 8:19 AM
And then we'll have some open access materials coming out hopefully next year, including a chapter on genetics by @stairwaytokevin.bsky.social and one on race science by @kevinlala.bsky.social and @gillianrbrown1.bsky.social
November 10, 2025 at 8:08 AM
If you want the papers going 'oh actually this isn't an adaptation, it's a cultural by product' or similar then you need to go topic by topic.

If you want an intro to (good) genetics within evolutionary social sciences Dan Nettle wrote 'Evolution and Genetics for Psychology'.
November 10, 2025 at 8:05 AM
Most EP people actively reject strong biological determinism (even if IMO too many fail to see how easily others will apply EP work deterministically.)
Louis Bachaud just published a paper on how the manosphere falls into such traps.
November 10, 2025 at 8:03 AM
This is very true and I've often advocated just this point.
(Keep in mind of course that bad vision science can lead to bad medical decisions. )
November 9, 2025 at 11:35 PM
The guy who thought Rushton was worth a punt found Watson too much of a c**t. That really says something!
November 9, 2025 at 11:07 PM
(Compelling bad ideas are annoyingly sticky of course, even when well rebutted. But that's not unique to EP by a long shot.)

Anyway, read the paper, marvel at the lack of actual good data on femininity and fertility. Consider doing the critical test research yourself?

/fin
#ehbea
#hbes
A systematic review of the association between women’s morphological traits and fertility | Evolutionary Human Sciences | Cambridge Core
A systematic review of the association between women’s morphological traits and fertility
www.cambridge.org
November 9, 2025 at 10:41 PM
And I know exactly why EP has such a bad image. And I get sick of all that research too. But science contains multitudes. Even those interested in sexual selection.
Most of the empirical take downs of poor EP ideas have come from within.
If we weren't interested we'd never have bothered...
November 9, 2025 at 10:32 PM
Ula Marcinkowska too.

On the flip side, EP co-founders Margot Wilson and Martin Daly did exactly the kind of thorough deep dive into sex differences in lethal aggression that was needed back in the 80s and THEN published Homicide.

3/
November 9, 2025 at 10:32 PM
Many of us who have tested Evo Psych ideas to destruction (or demonstrated the lack of such tests) came from within the field. I did it with masculinity/health.
@lhlidborg.bsky.social is doing it with dimirphism/fertility. Julia Stern and Ben Jones did it with menstrual cycle preference shifts.
2/
November 9, 2025 at 10:32 PM
There was an episode of Grange Hill around the time Tango came out when I was at primary school, where all the parents were going to see Fleetwood Mac and the teenagers were all saying "who the hell even are Fleetwood Mac?" That's the exact age cohort you're talking about.
November 9, 2025 at 7:08 PM
The Dance live DVD/album from ?1997? was a. Really good, and b. Really popular with my group of nerds at uni. It reminded everyone how good they'd been in the 70s.
November 9, 2025 at 6:59 PM
And sure, longitudinal studies like that are hard. But without that evidence, there's a lot of theorising being done without robust empirical underpinning.
November 9, 2025 at 4:20 PM
To be fair to the field, the main conclusion is that there are few to no studies actually testing the hypothesis properly (comparing earlier morphological traits with later fertility in high fertility populations), depending on the trait in question. But yes, those that do don't show much.
November 9, 2025 at 4:17 PM
Yeah we had blue school in 92 and blue 6th form in 97. But it was Rutland. They'd vote for anyone or anything in a blue rosette. Including the teenagers apparently.
November 7, 2025 at 9:52 PM
* I also voted for the same party as my parents (unless they voted dofferently to the poster they put in the window) but I had read all the manifestos and knew the local LD candidate and was sure I at least had made an informed decision of my own.
November 7, 2025 at 6:11 PM
I remember very clearly the shock of discovering not only did the Tories win our school's mock election in 1992, but many of my friends were pleased about the fact. My 'what do you mean you voted for the same party as your parents??' outrage was very intense.*
November 7, 2025 at 6:08 PM
Obligation.

We benefit from historical events from which others still suffer. So we have an obligation to them.
November 7, 2025 at 1:50 PM
Yeah, I spent most of my pre-internet teenage years trying to figure out if Kirsten Dunst were actually a child in Interview With a Vampire or a tiny adult because it was such a startlingly NOT 11yo performance. Thats super rare.
November 5, 2025 at 5:39 PM