The Evolution of Human Sexuality [Paperback]

Donald Symons (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"A classic. I have used it again and again in both senior level classes and graduate seminars."-- Professor Pierre L. Van Den Berghe, University of Washington

About the Author

Donald Symons is at University of California, Santa Barbara.

Product Details

• Paperback: 368 pages
• Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA; 1st Issued as OUP Ppbk 1981/ 2nd Pr. edition (February 5, 1981)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0195029070
• ISBN-13: 978-0195029079
• Product Dimensions: 7.9 x 5.3 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #439,578 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

16 of 17 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Battle Of The Sexes Is No Longer A Mystery!, November 6, 1999

By A Customer

This review is from: The Evolution of Human Sexuality (Paperback)

The great mystery to me when I was growing up was- Why were women and men so different in the way they handled sex? Why the huge differences in their sexual instincts?

In the book "The Evolution of Human Sexuality" these differences are explained in these terms:

If evolution existed, then successful sexual strategies had to be different for men and women.

Women openly acknowledge that they are attracted to men of wealth and power, with age a very distant secondary consideration if power and wealth are not to be had. This makes sense in terms of the fact that resources would have been available to raise her kids.

Another example: A man who wed a middle aged wealthy woman would have been a genetic dead end because the fertility of human females declines very rapidly after the age of 30-35. Youth, beauty (the appearance of health), and some assurance of fidelity (in wife material) was critical if his resources were to be committed to a woman. With one night stands, men can be far, far less picky.

The two sexes could not have evolved the same reproductive strategies. Success for one sex would have meant genetic oblivion for the other!

The offspring that survive would tend to have the same instincts of those humans who reproduced successfully. The patterns outlined in this great book can also be seen all thoughout the animal kingdom as well as in all peoples in all times.

You will understand what is going on with women and men after reading this book- it will not be that easy to discuss this with members of the opposit sex, however. This is a book for people who want to understand reality- not political correctness!

8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Standard Setting, August 21, 2001

By A Customer

This review is from: The Evolution of Human Sexuality (Paperback)

It's hard to believe this book is over twenty years old, so little has it dated. One of the very best of its genre. Current writers of thick easy paperbacks on the subject of human evolution have not matched this book for scholarship, relevance, or modest wit. Sprinkled with nicely chosen literary references that not only satisfy literary readers, but serve as an important and neglected source of data on human sexuality. Professional readers will have professional disputes and quibbles, but the average woman or man interested in their most basic interests will find this surprisingly readable academic book a revelation.

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Founding Work of the Modern Evolutionary Psychological Study of Sexuality, September 20, 2011

By 

V. E. Lane (UK) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: The Evolution of Human Sexuality (Paperback)

Research over the last three decades in the field which has become known as evolutionary psychology has focussed disproportionately on mating behaviour. Geoffrey Miller (1998) has even argued that it is the theory of sexual selection rather than that of natural selection which guides most research in the field. This does it result from the prurience of researchers. Rather, given that reproductive success is the ultimate currency of natural selection, reproductive behaviour is perhaps the form of behaviour most directly subject to selective pressures (see Miller 2000).

Almost all of this research ultimately traces its ancestry to the work which forms the subject of the current review. Indeed, much of it was explicitly designed to test his claims and predictions. For example, Symons discusses the age at which women are most attractive to men (p189). If human evolutionary history were characterised by fleeting one-off sexual encounters, this would be the age of greatest fertility. However, if men evaluate women for the purposes of more lasting unions, then men should be maximally attracted to women of the highest 'reproductive value' - in other words, those at the beginning of their reproductive careers such that a male is able to monopolise their entire reproductive output. A decade later, Kenrick and Keefe (1992) gathered the relevant data, confirming Symons impression that it was women of maximal reproductive value who were perceived as most attractive.

Support has even emerged for some of Symons' more speculative hunches. For example, one of Symons' two scenarios for the evolution of concealed ovulation in which he professed "little confidence" was that this had evolved so as to impede male mate-guarding and enable females select a biological father for their offspring different from their husbands. Data gathered by Bellis and Baker (1990) found that women indeed appear to time extra-pair copulations to coincide with ovulation. Similarly, other studies have found that women's mate preferences vary throughout their menstrual cycle in a manner compatible with a dual or mixed mating strategy, preferring males indicating willingness to invest in children at most times, but, when at their most fertile, preferring characteristics indicative of genetic quality (e.g. Penton-Voak et al 1999).

Interestingly, Symons also anticipated many of the mistakes evolutionary psychologists would be led into. He warns that researchers in modern western societies (where arranged marriages are unlawful) may be prone to overestimate the importance of female choice as a factor in human evolution, a warning almost entirely ignored by a subsequent generation of researchers and before being forcefully reiterated by Puts (2010).

Homosexuality as a "Test-Case"

An idea of the importance of Symons work can be ascertained by comparing it with contemporaneous works addressing the same subject-matter. Edward Wilson's On Human Nature was first published only a year before Symons'. Yet Wilson's chapter on sex bears little resemblance to the subject matter of modern evolutionary psychology. The latter portion of the chapter is devoted to introducing a now faintly embarrassing theory of the evolution of homosexuality which has subsequently received no empirical support.

In contrast, Symons' own treatment of homosexuality is innovative. It is also characteristic of his whole approach and illustrates why 'The Evolution of Human Sexuality' has been described by David Buss as "the first modern treatise on evolutionary psychology proper" (Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology p251). Rather than claiming all behaviours are adaptive even under current environments, Symons instead focuses on instead admittedly non-adaptive (or even maladaptive) behaviours as a window onto the psychology underlying them.

Accordingly, Symons does not concern himself with how homosexuality evolved, implicitly viewing it as a rare and maladaptive malfunctioning of normal sexuality. Instead, he uses homosexuality as a case-study and window on the nature of male and female sexuality as it manifests itself when freed from the constraints imposed by the opposite sex. Hence the relative promiscuity of homosexual men is seen as reflecting the universal male desire for sexual variety when freed from the constraints imposed the conflicting desires of women. (In contrast lesbian relationships are more similar to those among heterosexuals, suggesting, contrary feminist assumptions, that women exert decisive influence dictating the terms of heterosexual relations.)

This analysis rests on the contention that "there is no reason to suppose that homosexuals differ systematically from heterosexuals in any way other than their sexual object choice" (p292). Indeed, in some respects, Symons sees even sexual object choice as analogous among homosexual and heterosexual men - both evaluating prospective mates primarily on the basis physical appearance and youthfulness (p295). Contrary to the feminist claim that men are led to objectify women by the portrayal of the latter in the media, he notes the existence of a market for gay pornography parallel in most respects to heterosexual porn (p301).

However, this assumption of the fundamental similarity of heterosexual and homosexual male psychology has been challenged by David Buller (Adapting Minds: Evolutionary Psychology and the Persistent Quest for Human Nature (Bradford Books)). Buller cites evidence that male homosexuals are in some respects feminised in aspects of their behaviour. One of the few consistent correlates of homosexuality is gender non-conformity (which manifests in childhood before sexual orientation itself becomes apparent and therefore cannot be a case of gay men merely conforming to stereotype) and some evidence suggests level of exposure to prenatal masculinizing androgens in utero affects sexual orientation (Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation). As Buller notes, while male homosexuals may, like heterosexual men, prefer youthful sexual partners, they also appear to prefer sexual partners who are, in some respects (e.g. muscularity) highly masculine.

The resolution of this apparent paradox may lie in the possibility that some aspects of the psychology of male homosexuals are feminised but not others (perhaps because different parts of the brain are formed at different stages of development when levels of masculinising androgens may vary). Alternatively, male homosexuals lie midway between heterosexual men and women in their psychology, appearing relatively feminine only when compared to heterosexual men. Compared to women, they may be relatively masculine, as reflected in the male typical aspects of their sexuality focussed on by Symons. (This interpretation suggests the disturbing possibility that, freed from the restraints imposed by women, heterosexual men would be even more indiscriminately promiscuous than their homosexual counterparts.)

Pornography as a "Natural Experiment"

For Symons, fantasy represents another window onto sexual and romantic desires. Like homosexuality, fantasy is, by its very nature, unconstrained by the conflicting desires of the opposite sex (or indeed by anything other than the imagination of the fantasist).

Symons later collaborated in an investigation into sexual fantasy by means of a questionnaire (Ellis and Symons 1990). However, in the present work, he investigates fantasy indirectly by focussing on "the natural experiment of commercial periodical publishing" (p182), namely pornographic magazines, for which there exists a sizable male, but no equivalent female, audience. In many respects, this approach is preferable because, even in an anonymous questionnaire, individuals may be less than honest when dealing with a sensitive topic such as their sexual fantasies.

Unfortunately, when discussing pornography extensively, Symons' omits any discussion of romance literature, which can be viewed as the female equivalent of pornography. Subsequent research has suggested that romance novels provide insights into female psychology parallel to those provided into male psychology by pornography (e.g. Kruger et al 2003; Salmon 2004; see also Warrior Lovers: Erotic Fiction, Evolution and Female Sexuality).

Female Orgasm as Non-Adaptive

Perhaps excessively, an entire chapter is devoted to rejecting the claim that the female orgasm represents an adaptation. This conveniently contradicts the claim of critics of sociobiology such as Stephen Jay Gould that the field is 'ultra-Darwinian' and claims that all characteristics are necessarily adaptive. (Symons also rejects the claim that the menopause is adaptive (p13), a theory which has subsequently become known as the 'grandmother hypothesis'.) In contrast, Symons claims that the female capacity for orgasm is a by-product of the adaptive male capacity to orgasm - roughly the female equivalent of male nipples (only more fun).

Although Symons convincingly critiques the notion, popularised by Desmond Morris among others, that the female orgasm functions to enhance pair-bonding, subsequent generations of evolutionary psychologists have developed less naïve models of the adaptive function of female orgasm. Geoffrey Miller (2000) argues that the female orgasm functions as an adaptation for mate-selection. On this view, the very factors which Symons views as suggesting female orgasm is non-adaptive - such as the relative difficultly of stimulating female orgasm during vaginal sex - are... Read more ›