Pathological complexity and the evolution of sex differences

1997

American Journal of Human Biology, 2013

The handbook of evolutionary psychology, 2005

The evolution of life is the result of a process in which variant forms compete to harvest energy from the environment and convert it into replicates of those forms. Individuals "capture" energy from the environment (through foraging, hunting, or cultivating) and "allocate" it to reproduction and survival-enhancing activities. Selection favors individuals who efficiently capture energy and effectively allocate it to enhance fitness within their ecological niche.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2009

I argue that the magnitude and nature of sex differences in aggression, their development, causation, and variability, can be better explained by sexual selection than by the alternative biosocial version of social role theory. Thus, sex differences in physical aggression increase with the degree of risk, occur early in life, peak in young adulthood, and are likely to be mediated by greater male impulsiveness, and greater female fear of physical danger. Male variability in physical aggression is consistent with an alternative life history perspective, and context-dependent variability with responses to reproductive competition, although some variability follows the internal and external influences of social roles. Other sex differences, in variance in reproductive output, threat displays, size and strength, maturation rates, and mortality and conception rates, all indicate that male aggression is part of a sexually selected adaptive complex. Physical aggression between partners can be explained using different evolutionary principles, arising from the conflicts of interest between males and females entering a reproductive alliance, combined with variability following differences in societal gender roles. In this case, social roles are particularly important since they enable both the relatively equality in physical aggression between partners from Western nations, and the considerable cross-national variability, to be explained.

It is often argued that evolutionary theory and feminism remain in tension, since the evolutionary view of human nature is hard to reconcile with the feminist view. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that this thesis is false. This goal is realized by reconstructing a certain anti-feminist evolutionary argument (whose descriptive conclusion is the “patriarchal” picture of male and female nature, and the normative conclusion is the claim that given the deep differences between men and women the feminist postulates cannot be achieved) and providing its critique. The argument is based on three premises: a theory of parental investment, the assumption of a relatively large (compared with other species) men’s parental investment in ancestral environments, and the uncertainty of paternity. Its (descriptive) conclusion is the claim that men are “by nature” much more polygamously disposed, much more desirous of power (over the opposite sex), and much more aggressive than women. The paper presents several objections to this argument. The first objection questions its internal coherence. The second one points at its counterintuitive (not supported by empirical facts) consequences. The third one criticizes one of the assumptions of the argument, i.e. the assumption about a relatively large (compared with other species) men’s parental investment in ancestral environments.

KRITERION – Journal of Philosophy, 2024

Evolutionary psychology (EP) theorizes that contemporary women and men differ psychologically, particularly in mating and sexuality. It is further argued that EP research on gender-specific psychological differences is compatible with feminist perspectives. This paper analyzes if integrating EP scholarship on gender differences into feminist scholarship is possible by investigating EP's core scientific commitments. I will argue that EP's theories, hypotheses, and empirical findings that pertain to the study of gender do not align with its core values based on Longino's feminist theoretical virtues as outlined in the 1996 article "Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Values in Science: Rethinking the Dichotomy." I employ feminist theoretical virtues as tools for revealing how certain theories, models, and hypotheses rely upon, promote contentious norms, and suppress gender. I will defend the thesis that EP theories, hypotheses, and empirical findings are often empirically inadequate, androcentric, and ontologically too homogeneous. Further, EP employs single-factor control models, has no straightforward practical application, and might even be politically dangerous. These characteristics challenge a successful integration of EP into feminism.

The Challenge Hypothesis (Wingfield et al., 1990) originally focused on adult male avian testosterone elevated in response to same-sex competition in reproductive contexts. The purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate how the Challenge Hypothesis has shaped ideas about human life histories. We conduct a citation analysis, drawing upon 400 Google Scholar citations in the human literature to identify patterns in this body of scholarship. We cover key factors, such as context and personality traits, that help explain variable testosterone responses such as winning/losing to adult competitive behavior. Findings from studies on courtship and sexual behavior indicate some variation in testosterone responses depending on factors such as motivation. A large body of research indicates that male testosterone levels are often lower in contexts of long-term committed partnerships and nurturant fathering and aligned with variation in male mating and parenting effort. As the Challenge Hypothesis is extended across the life course, DHEA and androstenedione (rather than testosterone) appear more responsive to juvenile male competitive behavior, and during reproductive senescence, baseline male testosterone levels decrease just as male life history allocations show decreased mating effort. We discuss how research on testosterone administration, particularly in older men, provides causal insight into effects of testosterone in humans, and how this "natural experiment" can be viewed in light of the Challenge Hypothesis. We synthesize central concepts and findings, such as an expanded array of costs of testosterone that inform life history tradeoffs between maintenance and reproductive effort, and we conclude with directions for future research.

2014

Current Anthropology, 1993