The evolution of beauty by Richard O
Prum.
How Darwin’s forgotten theory of mate
choice shapes the animal world and us.
[The book covers various species of
animal kingdom, the notes taken only pertaining to human side]
In trying to understand human sexual
behavior, we must remember that many of our ideas about sexuality and gender
are culturally influenced, or culturally constructed, . Human sexuality is
uniquely complicated. It has been shaped by interactions among multiple sexual
selection mechanisms, often operating simultaneously. They include the
following:
· Male-male competition
· Female-female competition
· Mutual mating preference for ornamental traits that are common to
both sexes
· Female mating preference for male display
· Male mating preferences for female display
· Male sexual coercion
· Female sexual coercion
· Sexual conflicts.
Darwin proposed that nearly naked human
skin - the evolutionary reduction in body hair - evolved as a sexually selected
trait. Another unique trait - the retention specialized patches of hair in the
armpits, pubic region, scalp and eyebrows is ornamental. The fact that the
retention of these patches of hair is the same in both sexes. Underarm and
pubic hair cultivate aesthetic sexual odors through a combination of skin
secretions and microbes.
Among more than 5000 species of mammals
on earth, permanent breast tissue is unique to humans. The existence of
permanent breast development is not required for reproduction itself, and no
naturally selected advantage. Rather the existence of permanent breast in women
is likely an aesthetic trait that has evolved by male mate choice. Similarly,
the narrow waist, broad hips, and buttock fat in women might have been
exaggerated beyond the proportions necessitated by natural selection alone.
Similarly, there is a large
evolutionary psychology literature on facial ‘femininity - that is relatively
small chin, large eyes, high cheekbones and full lips - as an evolutionary
indicator of female ‘reproductive value’ or the remaining individual lifetime
reproductive potential.
Oddly there is a much smaller
literature on female preferences for male physical attractiveness than vice
versa. Even the data that do exist in print are difficult to interpret as
evidence of adaptationist views. For example, there is a consistent evidence
that females do not prefer the most masculine facial features, which have been
characterized as prominent square jaws, wide prominent brows, think eyebrows
and thin cheeks and lips. Numerous studies have shown that women instead prefer
intermediate or even what some researchers call feminine facial features in men
and one study has shown that female prefer a light stubble over a masculine
full beard. They tend to like lean but somewhat muscular male bodies with broad
shoulders and V shaped torsos the most, and men with larger more muscle bound
bodies the least.
Female mate choice has likely played a
crucial role in the evolution of one central feature of the male body - the
human penis. Among primates, the penis is one of the most variable of all
organs. From species to species, there are radical difference in its length,
width, thickness, shape, surface texture, and elaborations. All these
variations are beyond what is required to accomplish reproduction.
Human penis is substantially larger (6
inches) than that of other apes, even though humans are intermediate in body
size between gorillas (1.5 inches) and chimpanzees (3 inches). We should also
note than in contrast to human’s greater penis size and elaborations, humans have
testes that are both relatively and absolutely smaller than those of our
closest chimpanzee relatives.
Human males are notably distinct from
other primates in that they lack baculum, which is the mammalian penis bone
(functioning in retracting the penis between erections). Biologist Zevit and
Gilbert propose that the Genesis story claimed that God had created Eve not
from Adam’s rib, but from Adam’s baculum.
Male genital dangle would have become
an increasingly conspicuous display with the evolution of bipedality in the
last 5 million years of human history. Human’s exaggeratedly large scrotum
which is far bigger than is necessary to house testes is indicative of history
of selection for an additional communication rather than a mere physiological
function. That is, the scrotal sac might have gotten larger because female
liked the way it dangled.
The concept of beauty changed in
Western world. Now, even Marilyn Monroe would not make to the first round of
America’s Next Top model contest. Now, more emaciated, sometimes anorexic
female movie stars are considered as beauty queens. Similar changes happening
in male star selections - muscular physiques than the old style of softer bodes
of 40s & 50s.
Ethnic groups from different cultures
can vary considerably in appearance, but few of these variations are likely to
be under natural selection. For example, skin color variations in strongly
associated with latitude, the probable result of strong natural selection for
darker skin at equatorial latitudes to protect from skin cancer or preservation
of folate and strong natural selection of lighten skin at higher latitudes to
facilitate Vitamin D synthesis. Same goes with other differences color, shape,
size etc.
Female orgasm is completely unrelated
to female fertility. Female sexual pleasure and orgasm are the evolutionary
consequences of female desire and choice and they are ends unto themselves.
The hypothesis is supported by the
existence of many evolved features of human sexuality that are different from
our ape relatives and then can only be explained as expansion of sexual
pleasures. For Example, copulation duration in gorillas and chimpanzees is
measured in seconds. On average, human copulation lasts several minutes and of
course, can continue for far larger than that. The longer bouts of intercourse
would enhance female stimulation and create greater likelihood of orgasm. Any
evolutionary explanation for larger copulation times in humans is inherently
about enhancing the pleasurable sensory experience of sex.
The female orgasm might have been
evolved functions. It is sexual pleasure for its own sake, which has evolved
purely because of women’s pursuit of pleasure. In men, however, orgasm almost
always occurs with ejaculation and is thus required for sexual reproduction.
Consequently, the subjective experience of male orgasm is constrained by
natural selection for a peristaltic pumping of semi-viscous seminal fluids up
and down the vas deferens and out the urethra. Thus, the naturally selected
physiological function of male orgasm places limits on the magnitude,
frequencies and duration of male orgasmic pleasure.
Anthropological data from a range of
cultures document that there are plenty of men who take little interest in
women’s sexual pleasure and orgasm. In many societies, men initiate sex with
minimal foreplay and proceed to climax without ever concerning themselves with
the woman's pleasure. In fact, in many cultures, men aren’t even aware that it
is possible for a woman to have an orgasm. A 2000 survey found out that 42% of
college educated Pakistani men did not know that women were capable of orgasm.
Furthermore, many patriarchal cultures actively suppress women’s capacity for orgasm
through clitorectomy and other forms of toward female sexual pleasure and
orgasm by men in many of the world’s culture.
BY contrast, female orgasms are not
constrained by design for any ancillary physiological function. Female orgasms
do not need to deliver any goods or perform any task. The contractions of the
vaginal, uterine, perineal and abdominal muscles are enlisted purely in the
service of pleasure without the compromising constraints of fulfilling any
other function. This helps to explain why many women are capable of rapidly
repeated multiple orgasms. Because women’s orgasm does not need to accomplish
anything beyond pleasure itself, women require no recovery period and have no
limits on repeating the experience other than their own desire.
The hypothesis that human same-sex
behavior has evolved through natural and sexual selection for the expansion of
female sexual autonomy is congruent with great deal of the evidence on
variation in human sexual preference and behavior.
Darwin discovered that evolution is not
merely about the survival of the fittest but also about charm and sensory
delight in individual subjective experience. As Darwin hypothesized, with the
evolution and the choice comes the emergence of a new evolutionary agency - the
capacity of individual judgements to drive the evolutionary process itself.
Aesthetic evolution means the animals are aesthetic agents who play a role in
their own evolution.
The aesthetic view of life reveals new
ways in which evolutionary biology has been hampered by failing to recognize
the aesthetic agency of individual animals. For example, we can see that much
of the scientific study of sexuality has been characterized by a deep anxiety
about the subjective experiences of sexual pleasure and desire - esp. When it
is a matter of female pleasure.
The cultural sexual conflict theory
poses a productive and exciting new intellectual interface between aesthetic
evolution, sexual conflict, cultural evolution, and contemporary sexual and
gender politics. From this perspective, for example, it is not an accident that
patriarchal ideologies are focused so intently on the control of female
sexuality and reproduction and also on the condemnation and prohibition of
same-sex behavior. Female sexual autonomy and same-sex behavior have both
evolved to be disruptive to male hierarchical power and control. These
disruptive effects were likely the driving force behind the cultural invention
and maintenance of the patriarchy itself.
Aesthetic evolutionary theory reminds
us that women are not only sexual objects but also sexual subjects with their
own desires and the evolved agency to pursue them. Sexual desire and attraction
are not just tools of subjugation but individual and collective instruments of
social empowerment that can contribute to the expansion of sexual autonomy
itself.
Traditionally aesthetic philosophy has
failed to appreciate the aesthetic richness of the natural world, much of which
has come into being through the subjective evolution of the animals. By viewing
the beauties of the nature through an exclusively human gaze, we have failed to
comprehend the powerful agency of many nonhuman animals.
Originally, we human conceived of
ourselves as being at the center of all creation, with the sun and the stars
revolving around us. Over the last 500 years, however, scientific discoveries
have demanded that we reframe our view of the cosmos and our place in it. With
each discovery, humans have moved further and further from the organizing
center of universe. While many have found this intellectual change
disconcerning, I think such knowledge can only enhance our appreciation of the
astounding , unexpected richness of the biological world, human existence, our
conscious experience and our technological and cultural accomplishments.
No comments:
Post a Comment