The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
This is a discussion on The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality within the Dating, Love and Sex anti misandry forums, part of the Advice Corner category; Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality , and a Salon interview with Christopher Ryan This review is ...
- 26th-July-2010 #1
The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality, and a Salon interview with Christopher Ryan
This review is from: Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality (Hardcover)
This review originally appeared in Seed Magazine: Sexy Beasts
When we think of the first swinger parties most of us imagine 1970s counter-culture, we don't picture Top Gun fighter pilots in World War II. Yet, according to researchers Joan and Dwight Dixon, it was on military bases that "partner swapping" first originated in the United States. As the group with the highest casualty rate during the war, these elite pilots and their wives "shared each other as a kind of tribal bonding ritual" and had an unspoken agreement to care for one another if a woman's husband didn't make it back home. Like the sexy apes known as bonobos, this kind of open sexuality served a social function that provided a way to relieve stress and form long-lasting bonds.
For the husband and wife team Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethá in their new book Sex At Dawn, this example is one of many that suggests the human species did not evolve in monogamous, nuclear families but rather in small, intimate groups where "most mature individuals would have had several ongoing sexual relationships at any given time." We are the descendants of these multimale-multifemale mating groups and, even though we've constructed a radically different society from our hunter-gatherer forebears, the behavioral and psychological traits our species evolved in the distant past still manifest themselves today. Ryan, a psychologist, and Jethá, a psychiatrist, argue that understanding human sexual evolution this way helps to explain our species' unique creativity inside (as well as outside) the marriage bed. It may also shed light on why fidelity has been such a persistent problem for both men and women throughout recorded history.
For Ryan and Jethá there is little doubt that human beings are an exceedingly sexual species. As an example they detail how in 1902 the first home-use vibrator was patented and approved for domestic use in the United States. Fifteen years later there were more vibrators than toasters in American homes (today this number could be as high as fifty million nationwide). In 2006, according to U.S. Pornography Industry Revenue Statistics, people around the world--the majority of whom were probably men--spent an estimated $97 billion on pornographic material ($13.3 billion in the U.S. alone), a figure that exceeded the annual revenue of Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, Apple, and Netflix combined. To judge human sexuality based on consumption patterns, as Stephen Colbert would say, "the market has spoken." When this is combined with estimates that people engage in hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of copulations per child born (more than any primate, including chimpanzees and bonobos) there's little denying that the human animal is one sexy beast.
But why should a species often described as monogamous be so hypersexual? Monogamous animals by definition don't have to compete for reproduction and, as a result, are generally characterized by a low level of sexual activity. But according to Ryan and Jethá humans top a very short list of species that engage in sex for pleasure. "No animal spends more of its allotted time on Earth fussing over sex than Homo sapiens," they write. In fact, the animal world is filled with species who confine their sexual behavior to just a few periods each year, the only times when conception is possible. Among apes the only monogamous species are the gibbons whose infrequent, reproduction-only copulations make them much better adherents of the Vatican's guidelines than we are. In this way, Ryan and Jethá argue, repressing our sexuality should not be confused with reining in an "animal" nature; rather, it is denying one of the most unique aspects of what it means to be human.
The suggestion that humans did not evolve as a monogamous species is not as radical an idea as it may sound. In The Descent of Man Charles Darwin wrote, "Those who have most closely studied the subject [particularly the anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan] believe that communal marriage was the original and universal form throughout the world." Yet ever since the nineteenth century anthropologists have struggled over how to identify the mating system of human beings. In 1967 George P. Murdock's Ethnographic Atlas reported that only 14.5% of modern preindustrial societies could be classified as monogamous. Yet, in the West, researchers commonly refer to humans as "serially monogamous," based on the pattern of repeated monogamous marriages throughout men and women's lifetimes. But with over half of divorces occurring because of infidelity and one in 25 dads unknowingly raising children that they didn't father, this is not a picture that fits comfortably with monogamy of any sort, serial or otherwise.
However, by looking at modern indigenous societies and comparing the findings of anthropologists with the latest results in behavioral psychology and biology, Ryan and Jethá piece together a remarkably coherent pattern from an otherwise fractured understanding of human sexuality. From societies that believe that multiple men are necessary for a successful pregnancy (what researchers refer to as "partible paternity") to those where not having an extra-marital tryst will cause a man to be labeled "stingy of one's genitals" by his female suitors, the authors conclude that marriage may be an established social arrangement among many hunter-gatherers but it's one in which sexuality is decidedly fluid. A range of physiological evidence from Western populations is further offered to support this position, from the year-round libido in both sexes, to the unusually large size of men's genitalia compared to other apes, to the shifting sexual strategy during various stages in women's reproductive cycle (and lest we forget multiple female orgasms?). All suggest that our species is adapted for several concurrent sexual partners.
This is, of course, not a new idea in human evolutionary research. Primatologist Sarah Hrdy advocated a promiscuous mating system for humans in The Woman That Never Evolved (1999) while psychologist David Barash and psychiatrist Judith Lipton detailed their own argument in The Myth of Monogamy (2001). In Sex At Dawn Ryan and Jethá cover some similar ground as these previous authors but provide a great deal of additional material that was unavailable a decade ago. They also emphasize the ways in which monogamy has been used as a means of controlling women in patriarchal societies and make a number of insightful connections between the invention of agriculture 12,000 years ago and how sedentary societies influence the structure of human mating. However, with a relaxed writing style and numerous examples from modern popular culture, their discussion of these topics remains readily accessible even to those who may be encountering such ideas for the first time.
Sex At Dawn is a provocative and engaging synthesis of the latest research on human sexual evolution that has the added benefit of being a joy to read. While the authors' conclusion that healthy relationships can be both committed and open may come as a shock to some readers, others will likely find it refreshingly honest. As their example of WWII fighter pilots emphasizes, human sexuality has numerous social as well as emotional functions and there has never been only a single path chosen by the human species. In offering a fresh look at a fascinating and controversial topic Sex At Dawn is a book sure to generate discussion, and one likely to produce more than a few difficult conversations with family marriage counselors.
Eric Michael Johnson received his masters degree in primate behavior and is now pursuing his PhD in the history of science. He writes on issues of science, politics, and history at The Primate Diaries."Rights for women and responsibilities for men is really license for women, slavery for men, and liberty for neither. " Dylan MacVillain
- 26th-July-2010 # ADS
Advertisement Circuit advertisement- Member Since
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
- 26th-July-2010 #2
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
Very interesting.
Not only does the human being seem to be inordinately interested in sexual matters but also in finding reasons for it. And while 'researchers' are constantly harrassing freshman students with 'surveys' and 'attitude questionnaires' they attribute the mindless muttering of today's 18 year olds to cave men and jungle tribes of 20,000 years ago and more without a shred of relevant evidence. Bizarre reasoning ensues.
Explanations are always simple guesses when there are no facts to consider. Here we have an assumption that cave persons mated willy nilly. They may have done for all I know, but I have no proof whatsoever and neither do the authors so I could just as reasonably think that sex was invented to keep monkeys focused when swinging from branches and 'swinging' somehow was passed on to us as monkeys evolved into humans - but distorted a little.
It is likely that cave men didn't wipe their bottoms after shitting in the corner of the cave. Well, it took a while to invent toilet paper. But just as these 'researcher/authors use assumed behavious of old to justify their own sexual proclivities today, we can soon expect learned tomes telling us that it is right and proper to shit in the corner of your living room and walk off with a messy arsehole.
Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum
Love the Sinner but not the Sin.
(St. Augustine)
“ For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. “
(and within ourselves)
(Ephesians 6:12 (KJV)
A Feminist is a human being who has lost her way and turned vicious.
If you meet one on the road as you Go your Own Way,
offer kindness but keep your sword drawn.
(Me)
- 26th-July-2010 #3
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
It is more likely that the cave man would shit in the wood's and used some suitable vegitation to wipe the arse,though i can believe the female would shit in the corner of the cave,afraid something will bit their bum's,but i can imagine the situation she shouting at the man from not taking her crap out.
- 26th-July-2010 #4
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
Explanations are always simple guesses when there are no facts to consider. Here we have an assumption that cave persons mated willy nilly. They may have done for all I know, but I have no proof whatsoever and neither do the authors so I could just as reasonably think that sex was invented to keep monkeys focused when swinging from branches and 'swinging' somehow was passed on to us as monkeys evolved into humans - but distorted a little.
Read the book. The authors have plenty of proof, ranging from anthropological studies, to primate research, to anatomical data (why are our testicles so much bigger than gorillas'?). Don't assume there's no evidence without reading the book.
-
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
one of the most fascinating things to consider about human sexual behaviour is why are women receptive to sex constantly, and not just at their fertile points. It is clear that sex is used by the female to get support from males, after all, they dont generally have anything else to offer!
sharing women may be a useful way of bonding for folk not expected to live to see the next day, let alone their kids grow up, but strategies that work in high stress low life expectancy situations dont seem to work so well in civilised society because priorities are different when you have to consider raising the kids for the next 15 or so years..
- 27th-July-2010 #6
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
Even though women have a fraction of the drive of men, women have some powerful incentives for sex. Get pregnant and trap him into marriage or child support, set him up for false rape, offer sex as a "reward" to make him spend money on you and do things for you. Women will fake horniness and orgasms to please their men, make him putty for her pussy and control him. If he's dumb enough to marry her, she will slowly stop having sex with him as there's no more incentive. If he divorces, good for her as she gets his children(if any), his house and at least half his money! Men like me with low drives have zero incentive for sex and are in fact glad we aren't ruled by our dicks!
- 27th-July-2010 #7
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
Human sexualty is right strange thing, I think given the slut nature of women(Not Ladies) it became apreant that as human cilziation progressed that some controls on human sexualty were needed, others we all be fucking everyone and everything with a pussy or a cock, it would be very intresting to know why there was such a shift from such open sexual relationships(If what this" Study " says is true " to monogmuse relationships, who knows maybe it was to curb the spreat of what were fatial STDs back then that are easly cured in this day and age.
I think that this " Study " is just anexcuse for people(mostly women) to fuck around with whoever they please or so it seems to me.When the femanazis tell me it's their way or the highway I tell them to fuck off and die, because at lest the highway leads to new and intresting places, their ways is a dead end.
- 27th-July-2010 #8
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
The answer to the logical question that a few people asked about how anyone could know about the sex habits of our ancestors was provided in the second link listed above:
and a Salon interview with Christopher Ryan
...Given that these people have been dead for thousands of years, and we don't have a fossil record of sexual activity, isn't this hard to prove?
The evidence comes from several different areas. We look at pre-agricultural people who have been studied today and horticultural people who have been studied by anthropologists. There’s a fair amount of information about the sexuality of people who haven’t been deeply exposed to Western influence. There are accounts from travelers and colonialists, first-contact accounts from historical records, that we rely on. But you can also extract a great deal of information from the human body itself — from the design of the penis to the volume of the testicles to the sperm-producing potential of the testicular tissue and the way we have sex..."Rights for women and responsibilities for men is really license for women, slavery for men, and liberty for neither. " Dylan MacVillain
-
Re: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality
if anyone wants to know about the sexual habits of primitive humans, just ask me and Ill tell you a few tales!!
Womens "sex drive" is very easy to misunderstand, but it is something that if not controlled is very damaging because it is quite easy for men to get into a situation where they are having sex dozens of times daily and doing little else but having sex, or looking for it..
This is what happens when women are not properly controlled, a gent feels obliged you see, one cannot get much done when one feels a sense of duty to the lovely ladies who proffer their breeding parts so kindly to sir..




LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks








Reply With Quote






Bookmarks