There was an interesting speech last week to the American Psychological Association from Roy Beaumeister which was featured in this NYTimes column (and links to the speech itself). The speech was titled “Is There Anything Good About Men?” Provocative to say the least:
“The ’single most underappreciated fact about gender,’ he said, is the ratio of our male to female ancestors. While it’s true that about half of all the people who ever lived were men, the typical male was much more likely than the typical woman to die without reproducing. Citing recent DNA research, Dr. Baumeister explained that today’s human population is descended from twice as many women as men. Maybe 80 percent of women reproduced, whereas only 40 percent of men did.”
snip
“Men go to extremes more than women, and this fits in well with culture using them to try out lots of different things, rewarding the winners and crushing the losers.
Culture is not about men against women. By and large, cultural progress emerged from groups of men working with and against other men. While women concentrated on the close relationships that enabled the species to survive, men created the bigger networks of shallow relationships, less necessary for survival but eventually enabling culture to flourish. The gradual creation of wealth, knowledge, and power in the men’s sphere was the source of gender inequality. Men created the big social structures that comprise society, and men still are mainly responsible for this, even though we now see that women can perform perfectly well in these large systems.
What seems to have worked best for cultures is to play off the men against each other, competing for respect and other rewards that end up distributed very unequally. Men have to prove themselves by producing things the society values. They have to prevail over rivals and enemies in cultural competitions, which is probably why they aren’t as lovable as women.”
I like this proposal that whatever individual or community-wide gender roles exist, we live in a culture which uses both men and women to fulfill it’s own ambitions above all else. Is his argument sound or just sound-and-fury?
Ya, see - you pull me in with a title like that, and then I find out this post is not, in fact, about hot chicks, but serious stuff.
-
My marriage started working well when I stopped trying to make her into another me, and she stopped trying to make me into another her. We accepted our differences, realised that we were a good team when each of us was allowed to concentrate on his/her strengths, and picked up the slack for each other’s weaknesses.
-
I have no reason to believe this doesn’t apply society-wide as well. Gender’s a part of it, but not all of it.
The 40/80 rule. Proves that women are much more selective in who they’ll mate with. And why more men become serial killers.
While women concentrated on the close relationships that enabled the species to survive, men created the bigger networks of shallow relationships, less necessary for survival but eventually enabling culture to flourish.
Women make life, but men make life fun. Sounds about right.
Kevin, are you sure about your interpretation? If 80% of women reproduce and only 40% of men that would tend to indicate that women were less selective, not more.