Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biological Costs of a Small Stature for Homo sapiens Females: New Perspectives on Stature Sexual Dimorphism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences

Abstract

The idea that sexual selection can oppose natural selection in favouring costly traits is a Darwinian idea that has been much explored by evolutionary biology within the last 50 years. Sexual dichromatism in birds and sexual dimorphism of body size in mammals represent well known examples of this theoretical issue. In the few theorisations on stature sexual dimorphism (SSD) in the human species, the absence of questioning on costs is unsettling. Considering the reproductive advantage of a big size for mammalian females in general and the obstetrical costs of a small stature for human females in particular, this article explores critically ancient and recent hypotheses advanced for explaining SSD in the human lineage. The reason proposed to the impenetrable lack of theoretical coherence pinpointed here is an epistemic obstacle at the heart of the scientific models looking at humans: gendered cultural norms and practices are not seen as potential selective forces that could oppose natural selection and thus favour costly morphological traits in our species.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a critique, See. Swami (2007).

  2. 2.

    See. Huneman on selection, Chap. 4, this volume.

References

  • Abitbol, M. (1987). Obstetrics and posture in pelvic anatomy. Journal of Human Evolution, 16(3), 243–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, R. D., Hoogland, J. L., Howard, R. D., Noonan, K. M., & Sherman, P. W. (1979). Sexual dimorphisms and breeding systems in pinnipeds, ungulates, primates, and humans. In N. Chagnon & W. Irons (Eds.), Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective. North Scituate: Duxbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allal, N., Sear, R., Prentice, A. M., & Mace, R. (2004). An evolutionary model of stature, age at first birth and reproductive success in Gambian women. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 271, 465–470.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Badyaev, A. V. (2002). Growing apart: An ontogenetic perspective on the evolution of sexual size dimorphism. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17(8), 369–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basso, O., Wilcox, A. J., Weinberg, C. R., & Baird, D. D. (2004). Height and risk of severe pre-eclampsia: A study within the Danish national birth cohort. International Journal of Epidemiology, 33, 858–863.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berge, C. (2003). L’évolution du bassin humain: approche fonctionnelle. In C. Susanne, E. Rebato & B. Chiarelli (dir.), Anthropologie biologique. Évolution et biologie humaine. De Boeck & Larcier: Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogoraz-Tan, V. G. (1904–1909). The Chukchee: Material culture. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonniol, M. (1992). La couleur comme maléfice. Une illustration créole de la généalogie des Blancs et des Noirs. Paris: Albin Michel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozon, M. (1991). Apparence physique et choix du conjoint. In T. Hibbert & L. Roussel (dir.), La nuptialité: évolution récente en France et dans les pays développés. Paris: INED/PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P. H., Harris, J., Leakey, R. E. F., & Walker, A. (1985). Early Homo erectus skeleton from West Lake Turkana, Kenya. Nature, 316, 788–792.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1992). Mate preference mechanisms: Consequences for partner choice and intrasexual competition. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock, T. H. (1994). The costs of sex. In R. V. Short & E. Balaban (Eds.), The differences between the sexes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, G., Naidoo, C., Conroy, R. M., Byrne, P., & McKenna, P. (2003). A new predictor of cephalopelvic disproportion? Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 23(1), 27–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Counihan, C. M. (1999). The anthropology of food and body. Gender, meaning and power. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danchin, É., Giraldeau, L.-A., & Cézilly, F. (2008). Behavioural ecology: An evolutionary perspective on behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: J Murray.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. (2006). The third chimpanzee: The evolution and future of the human animal. New York: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eveleth, P. B. (1975). Differences between ethnic groups in sex dimorphism of adult height. Annals of Human Biology, 2(1), 35–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbairn, D. J., Blanckenhorn, W. U., & Székely, T. (Eds.). (2007). Sex, size and gender roles: Evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1915). The evolution of sexual preference. Eugenics Review, 7, 184–192.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frayer, D. W., & Wolpoff, M. H. S. (1985). Sexual dimorphism. Annual Review of Anthropology, 14, 429–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaulin, S., & Boster, J. (1985). Cross-cultural differences in sexual dimorphism: Is there any variance to be explained? Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 219–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebbie, D. A. M. (1981). Reproductive anthropology: Descent through woman. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillis, J. S., & Avis, W. E. (1980). The male taller norm in mate selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(3), 396–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, A. H. (2006). Seeing culture in biology. In G. T. H. Ellison & A. Goodman (Eds.), The nature of difference. Science, society and human biology. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1985). Sex and size. In S. J. Gould, The Flamingo’s smile. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gouyon, P.-H., Henry, J.-P., & Arnould, J. (1997). Les avatars du gène. La théorie néodarwinienne de l’évolution. Paris: Belin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guégan, J.-F., Teriokhin, A. T., & Thomas, F. (2000). Human fertility variation, size related obstetrical performance and the evolution of sexual stature dimorphism. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 267, 2529–2535.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson, A., & Lindenfors, P. (2004). Human size evolution: No evolutionary allometric relationship between male and female stature. Journal of Human Evolution, 47, 253–266.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. E. (1975). Variation among five groups of Amerindians in the magnitude of sexual dimorphism of skeletal size. Ph.D., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herpin, N. (2006). Le pouvoir des grands. De l’influence de la taille des hommes sur leur statut social. Paris: La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrdy, S. B. (1997). Raising Darwin’s consciousness: Female sexuality and the prehominid origins of patriarchy. Human Nature, 8(1), 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappel, B., Ericksen, G., Hansen, K. B., Hvidman, L., Krag-Olsen, B., Nielsen, J., Videbach, P., & Wohlert, M. (1987). Short stature in Scandinavian women. An obstetrical risk factor. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 66, 153–158.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Karubian, J., & Swaddle, J. P. (2001). Selection on females can create ‘larger males’. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 268, 725–728.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krogman, W. M. (1951). The scars of human evolution. Scientific American, 184, 54–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. D., Willner, L. A., & Dettling, A. (1994). The evolution of sexual size dimorphism in primates. In R. V. Short & E. Balaban (Eds.), The differences between the sexes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (1983). How to carry out the adaptationist programme? American Naturalist, 121, 324–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McHenry, H. (1976). Early hominid body weight and encephalization. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 45, 77–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J., Williams, G. M., Najman, J. M., & Andersen, M. J. (1991). The influence of paternal height and weight on birth-weight. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 31(2), 114–116.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, U., & Mazur, A. (2001). Evidence of unconstrained directional selection for male tallness. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 50(4), 302–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, C. J. L., & Lopez, A. D. (Eds.). (1998). Health dimensions of sex and reproduction. The global burden of sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, maternal conditions, perinatal disorders and congenital anomalies. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nettle, D. (2002). Women’s height, reproductive success and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in modern humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 269, 1919–1923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski, B., Dunbar, R. I. M., & Lipowicz, A. (2000). Tall men have more reproductive success. Nature, 403, 156.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pitnick, S., & Garcia-Gonzalez, F. (2002). Harm to females increases with male body size in Drosophila melanogaster. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 269, 1821–1828.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Plavcan, J. M. (2001). Sexual dimorphism in primate evolution. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 44, 25–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prichard, C. W., Sutherland, H. W., & Carr-Hill, R. A. (1983). Birthweight and paternal height. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 90(2), 156–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollet, T. V., & Nettle, D. (2008). Taller women do better in a stressed environment: Height and reproductive success in rural Guatemalan women. American Journal of Human Biology, 20, 264–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ralls, K. (1976). Mammals in which females are larger than males. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 51, 245–276.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ridley, M. (2004). Evolution (3rd ed.). Malden: Blackwell Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sear, R. (2006). Height and reproductive success: How a Gambian population compares to the West. Human Nature, 17(4), 405–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sear, R., Allal, N., & Mace, R. (2004). Height, marriage and reproductive success in Gambian women. Research in Economic Anthropology, 23, 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepperd, J., & Strathman, A. (1989). Attractiveness and height: The role of stature in dating preference, frequency of dating, and perceptions of attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 617–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, D., Sawadogo, L., & Adjibade, A. (1991). Short stature and cephalopelvic disproportion in Burkina Faso, West Africa. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 35, 347–350.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spielmann, K. A. (1989). A review: Dietary restrictions on hunter-gatherer women and the implications for fertility and infant mortality. Human Ecology, 17(3), 321–345.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stanford, C. B. (1999). The hunting apes. Meat eating and the origin of human behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V. (2007). Evolutionary psychology: ‘New science of mind’ or ‘Darwinian fundamentalism’? Historical Materialism, 15(4), 105–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swami, V., Furnham, A., Balakumar, N., Williams, C., Canaway, K., & Stanistreet, D. (2008). Factors influencing preferences for height: A replication and extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 395–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabet, P. (1979). Les mains, les outils les armes. L’Homme, XIX(3–4), 5–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tague, R. G. (2000). Do big females have big pelves? American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 112, 377–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, F., Teriokhin, A. T., Budilova, E. V., Brown, S. P., Renaud, F., & Guegan, J. F. (2004). Human birthweight evolution across contrasting environments. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 17(3), 542–553.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Touraille, P. (2008). Hommes grands, femmes petites: une évolution coûteuse. Les régimes de genre comme force sélective de l’adaptation biologique. Paris: Éditions de la maison des sciences de l’Homme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, M. A., Newton, C. S., & Johnson, I. R. (1995). Paternal influences on birthweight. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 74(1), 15–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, L. D., & Gray, P. J. (1982). A cross-cultural investigation into the sexual dimorphism of stature. In R. L. Hall (Ed.), Sexual dimorphism in Homo sapiens: A question of size. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Workman, L., & Reader, W. (2008). Evolutionary psychology: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire d’Eco-Anthropologie, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France

    Priscille Touraille

Authors
  1. Priscille Touraille
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Priscille Touraille .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Génétique Animale et Biologie Intégrative, INRA, UMR 1313, Jouy-en-Josas, France

    Thomas Heams

  2. Institut d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques, CNRS/Université Paris I Sorbonne/ENS, Paris, France

    Philippe Huneman

  3. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle (MNHN), Paris, France

    Guillaume Lecointre

  4. Éditions Matériologiques, Paris, France

    Marc Silberstein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Touraille, P. (2015). Biological Costs of a Small Stature for Homo sapiens Females: New Perspectives on Stature Sexual Dimorphism. In: Heams, T., Huneman, P., Lecointre, G., Silberstein, M. (eds) Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9014-7_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation