Skip to main content
Log in

Are evolutionary psychology assumptions about sex and mating behaviors valid? A historical and cross-cultural exploration

  • Published:
Dialectical Anthropology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this essay, I make a case for the thesis that much of the uniformity that we see in mate selection, marriage practices, and children rearing is an outcome of a European empire based on Judeo-Christian values that once held control of most of the territories of the world. This view contrasts with the one offered by evolutionary psychologists, according to whom such uniformity is explained by the existence of specific psychological mechanisms that have been inherited from the Pleistocene because they were advantageous in terms of reproductive fitness during ‘ancestral times.’ Historical records demonstrate that, prior to the arrival of European colonists to many regions of the world, there was a fantastic diversity of mating practices and childrearing styles. Historical records also demonstrate that the European conquerors were discomfited by these practices and used force and persuasion to transform the marital and sexual values of these communities. I also examine existing hunting and forager communities and find that most of them practice a communal form of childrearing that involves both related and unrelated adults. Among forager communities that have greater contact with the outside world, there is much more assimilation to larger state values. Finally, even in the most patriarchal societies, fathers exert a great deal of control over the rearing and education of young children. In many patriarchal communities, even when the mother leaves for the natal family, she is forced to leave her children behind with the father’s family so the children are reared with their father’s family ideals and values. Thus, successful parenting for the father may involve passing on his family traditions to his children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abel, Y. 2012. African-American fathers’ involvement in their children’s school-based lives. The Journal of Negro Education 81(2): 162–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguirre, J., and D.J. Marshall. 2012. Does genetic diversity reduce sibling competition? Evolution 66(1): 94–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth, S.E., and J.K. Maner. 2012. Sex begets violence: Mating motives, social dominance, and physical aggression in men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103(5): 819–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, K.G., H. Kaplan, and J. Lancaster. 1999. Paternal care by genetic fathers and stepfathers. II. Reports from Albuquerque men. Evolution and Human Behavior 20: 405–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, M. 2007. Sexual selection under parental choice: The role of parents in the evolution of human mating. Evolution and Human Behavior 28: 403–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, M. 2013. Interfamily conflict, reproductive success, and the evolution of male homosexuality. Review of General Psychology 17(3): 288–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkow, J.H., J. Tooby, and L. Cosmides (eds.). 1992. The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, H. 2007. Customs associated with premarital sexual freedom in 143 societies. Cross-Cultural Research: The Journal Of Comparative Social Science 41(3): 261–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendesky, A., and C.I. Bargmann. 2011. Genetic contributions to behavioural diversity at the gene-environment interface. Nature Reviews Genetics 12(12): 809–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, M.S., and J.S. Reber. 1998. The illusion of intimacy: A Levinasian critique of evolutionary psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 18(2): 176–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjee, S. 1990. Motherhood in ancient India. Economic and Political Weekly 25: WS50–WS57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjorklund, D.F., and C.H. Blasi. 2005. Evolutionary developmental psychology. In The handbook of evolutionary psychology, ed. D.M. Buss, 828–850. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackwood, E. 2005. Wedding bell blues: Marriage, missing men, and matrifocal follies. American Ethnologist 32(1): 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolhuis, J.J., G.R. Brown, R.C. Richardson, and K.N. Laland. 2011. Darwin in mind: New opportunities for evolutionary psychology. PLoS Biology 9(7): 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowdler, S., and J. Balme. 2010. Gatherers and grannies. Australian Feminist Studies 25(66): 391–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd-Franklin, N. 1989. Black families in therapy: A multisystems approach. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brettell, C.B., and C.F. Sargent. 2001. Gender in cross-cultural perspective. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A., A. Kandler, and D. Good. 2012. Women who know their place: Sex-based differences in spatial abilities and their evolutionary significance. Human Nature 23: 133–148.

  • Burnstein, E., C. Crandall, and S. Kitayama. 1994. Some neo-Darwinian rules for altruism: Weighing cues for inclusive fitness as a function of the biological importance of the decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 773–789.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buller, D. 2005. Adapting minds: Evolutionary psychology and the persistent quest for human nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M. 1988. The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 616–628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M. 1989. Sex difference in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12: 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M. 1992. Is there a universal human nature?. Psyccritiques, 37(12): 1262–1263.

  • Buss, D.M. 1995. Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry 6: 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M. (ed.). 2005. The handbook of evolutionary psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D.M. 2013. The science of human mating strategies: An historical perspective. Psychological Inquiry 24(3): 171–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calderón, R.R., U.U. Aresti, B.B. Ambrosio, and A.A. González-Martín. 2009. Inbreeding coefficients for X-linked and autosomal genes in consanguineous marriages in Spanish populations: The case of Guipúzcoa (Basque Country). Annals of Human Genetics 73(2): 184–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapais, B. 2008. Primeval kinship: How pair-bonding gave birth to human society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapais, B., and C.M. Berman. 2004. Kinship and behavior in primates. NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherlin, A. 1983. Changing family and household: Contemporary lessons from historical research. Annual Review of Sociology 9: 51–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M., L.L. Barber, R. Zhaoyang, and A.E. Talley. 2011. Motivational pursuits in the context of human sexual relationships. Journal of Personality 79(6): 1031–1066.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosmides, L., Tooby, J. Dissecting the computational architecture of social inference mechanisms. In Characterizing human psychological adaptations (Ciba Foundation Symposium #208). Chichester: Wiley; 1997. p. 132–156.

  • Crane-Seeber, J., and B. Crane. 2010. Contesting essentialist theories of patriarchal relations: Evolutionary psychology and the denial of history. Journal of Men’s Studies 18(3): 218–237.

  • Daly, M., and M. Wilson. 1980. Male and female. Sciences 20(3): 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A., J. Rhodes, and J. Hamilton-Leaks. 1997. When both parents may be a source of support and problems: An analysis of pregnant and parenting female African American adolescents’ relationships with their mothers and fathers. Journal of Research on Adolescence 7: 331–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derksen, M. 2005. Against integration: Why evolution cannot unify the social sciences. Theory and Psychology 15: 139–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeParle, J. and S. Tavernise. 2012. For women under 30, most births are outside marriage. NY Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-occur-outside-marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.

  • DeSteno, D.A., and P. Salovey. 1996. Evolutionary origins of sex differences in jealousy? Questioning the ‘fitness’ of the model. Psychological Science 7(6): 367–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A.H. 1987. Sex differences in social behavior: social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum

  • Eisler, R. 1987. Chalice & the blade. Chalice & The Blade, SocINDEX, EBSCOhost (accessed August 25, 2014).

  • Foxhall, C. 2013. Studying gender in Etruscan society. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouts, H.N. 2008. Father involvement with young children among the Aka and Bofi foragers. Cross-Cultural Research 42(3): 290–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouts, H.N., and R.A. Brookshire. 2009. Who feeds children? A child’s-eye-view of caregiver feeding patterns among the Aka foragers in Congo. Social Science and Medicine 69(2): 285–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, J. 1997. African American families: A historical note. In Black families, 3rd ed, ed. H.P. McAdoo, 5–8. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fussell, N.J., and B.T. Stollery. 2012. Between-sex differences in romantic jealousy: Substance or spin? A qualitative analysis. Evolutionary Psychology 10(1): 136–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gannon, L. 2002. A critique of evolutionary psychology. Psychology, Evolution & Gender 4(2): 173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garbaty, T.J. 1977. The uncle–nephew motif: New light into its origins and development. Folklore 88(2): 220–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, C., and J. Rhodes. 2003. Adolescent mothers’ relationship with their biological fathers: Social support, social strain, and relationship continuity. Journal of Family Psychology 17: 370–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, E. 1990. Evolution, neo-Darwinism and the paradigm of science. The Ecologist 20(2): 51–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorelik, G., and T.K. Shackelford. 2011. Human sexual conflict from molecules to culture. Evolutionary Psychology 9(4): 564–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossberg, S., and T. Vladusich. 2010. How do children learn to follow gaze, share joint attention, imitate their teachers, and use tools during social interactions? Neural Networks 23(8/9): 940–965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubin, D. 1993. Sexual offending: A cross-cultural comparison. Annual Review of Sex Research 3: 201–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S.J. 1981. The mismeasure of man. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hankin, B.L. 2013. Critical reflections on evolutionary psychology and sexual selection theory as explanatory account of emergence of sex differences in psychopathology: Comment on Martel (2013). Psychological Bulletin 139(6): 1260–1264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C.R., and H.E. Pashler. 1995. Evolution and human emotions. Psychological Inquiry 6(1): 44–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield, E., C. Luckhurst, and R. Rapson. 2010. Sexual motives: Cultural, evolutionary, and social psychological perspectives. Sexuality and Culture 14(3): 173–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, K.R., R.S. Walker, M. Božičević, J. Eder, T. Headland, B. Hewlett, and B. Wood. 2011. Co-residence patterns in hunter-gatherer societies show unique human social structure. Science 331(6022): 1286–1289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshberg, L. 2012. Nuclear families: (Re)producing 1950s Suburban America in the Marshall Islands. OAH Magazine of History 26(4): 39–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, A. 2009. Compelling evidence: Marriage, colonialism and the question of Indigenous rights. Women’s History Review 18(1): 121–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huen, Y. 2007. Policy response to declining birth rate in Japan: Formation of a “gender-equal” society. East Asia: An International Quarterly 24(4): 365–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, H.H., and J. Reed. 1969. “Black matriarchy” reconsidered: Evidence from secondary analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly 33(3): 346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingoldsby, B.B. 1995. Marital structure. In Families in multicultural perspective, ed. B.B. Ingoldsby, and S. Smith, 117–137. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivey, P.K. 2000. Cooperative reproduction in Ituri Forest hunter-gatherers: Who cares for Efe infants? Current Anthropology 41(5): 856–866.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, R. 1987. Governments and culture: How women made Kerala literate. Pacific Affairs 60(3): 447–472 (Autumn, 1987).

  • Jeffrey, R. 2005. Legacies of matriliny: The place of women and the Kerala model. Pacific Affairs 77(4): 647–664 (Winter, 2004/2005).

  • Johnson, L., and R. Staples. 2005. Black families at the crossroads. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D., A. Zalot, S. Foster, E. Sterrett, and C. Chester. 2007. A review of childrearing in African American single mother families: The relevance of a co-parenting framework. Journal of Child and Family Studies 16(5): 671–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. 2012. Why are we so different from chimps? (Cover story). New Scientist 213(2857): 34–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanazawa, S. 2003. Can evolutionary psychology explain reproductive behavior in the contemporary United States? The Sociological Quarterly 44(2): 291–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavoussi, L. 2012. Low tax rates and high divorce rates explain why Americans work more than Europeans. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/21/low-tax-rates-high-divorce-rates_n_1533555.html.

  • Kelly, P. 2012. The brain in the jar: A critique of discourses of adolescent brain development. Journal Of Youth Studies 15(7): 944–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, K.L., and R.D. Greaves. 2011. Postmarital residence and bilateral kin associations among hunter-gatherers: Pumé foragers living in the best of both worlds. Human Nature 22(1–2): 41–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruger, D.J., and M.L. Fisher. 2008. Women’s life history attributes are associated with preferences in mating relationships. Evolutionary Psychology 6(2): 289–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landrine, H., and E.A. Klonoff. 1996. Traditional African American practices: Prevalence and correlates. The Western Journal of Black Studies 20(2): 59–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemercinier, G. 1979. Kinship relationships and religious symbolism among the clans of Kerala during the Sangan period (first century A.C.). Social Compass 26(4): 461–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, S. 2005. Developmental determinants of sensitivity and resistance to stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology 30(10): 939–946.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.G., D. Conroy-Beam, L. Al-Shawaf, A. Raja, T. DeKay, and D.M. Buss. 2011. Friends with benefits: The evolved psychology of same- and opposite-sex friendship. Evolutionary Psychology 4: 543–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn-Blake, S., and C. Darling. 1993. Understanding the strengths of African American families. Journal of Black Studies 23: 460–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loos, T. 2008. A history of sex and the state in Southeast Asia: Class, intimacy and invisibility. Citizenship Studies 12(1): 27–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S.C. 2006. Matrilineal clans and kin terms on Rossel Island. Anthropological Linguistics 48(1): 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe, F. 2003a. The mating system of foragers in the standard cross-cultural sample. Cross-Cultural Research 37: 282–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe, F.W. 2003b. A critical period for provisioning by Hadza men: Implications for pair bonding. Evolution and Human Behavior 24(3): 217–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martens, J. 2009. ‘Civilised domesticity’, race and European attempts to regulate African marriage practices in colonial Natal, 1868–1875. History Of The Family (Elsevier Science) 14(4): 340–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, E.P., and J.M. Martin. 1978. The black extended family. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGadney-Douglass, B.F., and R.L. Douglass. 2008. Collective familial decision-making in times of trouble: Intergenerational solidarity in Ghana. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 23(2): 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meehan, C.L. 2005. The effects of residential locality on Parental and Allopai ental investment among the Aka Foragers of the Central African Republic. Human Nature 16(1): 58–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menon, V. 2012. Matriliny, patriliny and the postmodern condition: Complexities of ‘family’ in Kerala. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 43(1): 41–51.

  • Meyers, D. 2012. FEAST cluster on feminist critiques of evolutionary psychology—editor’s introduction. Hypatia 27(1): 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G.F. 2013. Mutual mate choice models as the red pill in evolutionary psychology: Long delayed, much needed, ideologically challenging, and hard to swallow. Psychological Inquiry 24(3): 207–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Min-Jung, J., and H.N. Fouts. 2011. Multiple caregivers’ touch interactions with young children among the Bofi foragers in Central Africa. International Journal of Psychology 46(1): 24–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohlin, E. 2012. Evolution of theories of mind. Games and Economic Behavior 75(1): 299–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montenegro, X. 2004. The divorce experience. Research conducted for AARP the magazine. Washington, DC.

  • Morelli, G.A., and E.Z. Tronick. 1992. Efe fathers: One among many? A comparison of forager children’s involvement with fathers and other males. Social Development 1(1): 36–54. doi:10.1111/j.1467-950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee, P. (1929). Psychology of rites. Indian Journal of Psychology, 49: 147–160.

  • Mumford, K.J. 2012. Untangling pathology: The Moynihan report and homosexual damage, 1965–1975. Journal of Policy History 24(1): 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, C. 2012. Genetics, race, and relatedness: Human mobility and human diversity in the genographic project. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 102(3): 667–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakland, T., and L. Lu. 2006. Temperament styles of children from the People’s Republic of China and the United States. School Psychology International 27(2): 192–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, J.F., K.K. Hawkes, K.D. Lupo, and N.G. Blurton Jones. 2002. Male strategies and Plio-Pleistocene archaeology. Journal of Human Evolution 43(6): 831.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, L. 2008. Silent partner: The role of unpaid market labor in families. Feminist Economics 14: 32–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, T. 2012. Circular taxonomies: Regulating European and American Women through representations of North American Indian Women. Early American Literature 41(2): 183–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R.R. 2011. First comes marriage, then comes divorce: A perspective on the process. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 52(7): 557–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sands, K.M. 1997. Collaboration or colonialism: Text and process in Native American women’s autobiographies. Melus 22(4): 39–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford, T.K., D.P. Schmitt, and D.M. Buss. 2005. Universal dimensions of human mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences 39(2): 447–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, D.P. 2003. Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(1): 85–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, A.M., T.A. Linksvayer, J.J. Boomsma, and J.S. Pederson. 2011. No benefit in diversity? The effect of genetic variation on survival and disease resistance in a polygynous social insect. Ecological Entomology 36(6): 751–759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, S., and M. Hassebrauck. 2012. Sex and age differences in mate-selection preferences. Human Nature 23(4): 447–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sear, R. (2008). Kin and child survival in rural Malawi: Are matrilineal kin always beneficial in a matrilineal society? Human Nature, 19(3).

  • Shadle, B.L. 2006. “Girl cases:” Marriage and colonialism in Gusiiland, Kenya, 1890–1970. New York: Praeger Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. 2005. Native American feminism, sovereignty, and social change. Feminist Studies 31(1): 116–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, T. 2012. The changing face of the American family. History Today 62(11): 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staples, R. 1972. The matricentric family system: A cross-cultural examination. Journal of Marriage and Family 34(1): 156–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephen, E. 2011. Policy concerns of low fertility for military planning in South Korea. Asiapacific Issues 102: 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, P. 2007. Who is kin? Family definition and African American families. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 15(2/3): 163–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soto, S. 2006. Evolution and contemporary social transformations in families. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 37(4): 495–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudarkasa, N. 1997. African American families and family values. In Black families, 3rd ed, ed. H.P. McAdoo, 9–40. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teachman, J., L. Tedrow, and M. Hall. 2006. The demographic future of divorce and dissolution. In Handbook of divorce and relationship dissolution, ed. M.A. Fine, and J.H. Harvey, 59–82. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., Cosmides, L. 1992. The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, J.Tooby (eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Uller, T., and R. Leimu. 2011. Founder events predict changes in genetic diversity during human-mediated range expansions. Global Change Biology 17(11): 3478–3485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Val, B. 1982. The dialectic of women’s oppression: Notes in the relationship between capitalism and patriarchy. Berkeley Journal of Sociology 27: 51–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, R.S., K.R. Hill, M.V. Flinn, and R.M. Ellsworth. 2011. Evolutionary history of hunter-gatherer marriage practices. PLoS One 6(4): e19066.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, S. 1997. Modernizing the motherhood archetype. New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zentner, M., and K. Mitura. 2012. Stepping out of the Caveman’s shadow: Nations’ gender gap predicts degree of sex differentiation in mate preferences. Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.) 23(10): 1176–1185.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gowri Parameswaran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Parameswaran, G. Are evolutionary psychology assumptions about sex and mating behaviors valid? A historical and cross-cultural exploration. Dialect Anthropol 38, 353–373 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-014-9356-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-014-9356-z

Keywords

Navigation