Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Video Games Make Abstinence Awesome | Lunchtime Quickie: Why Dogs Are Sti… »

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Science A Word on Sperm Competition

Posted by Charles Mudede on Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:25 PM

One more thing about the Sex at Dawn book:

The core of the book's argument is that the kind of strong social bonds that were needed for our success as a species would not have been possible if mating competition took place at the level of the body and not the level of the microscopic. Sperm competition, the book argues, is where male competition really takes place. Meaning, women in early human societies had sex with multiple partners, and the male with the best sperm became a father. Some of the truth for this hypothesis is found in the human balls.

Human males have larger testes than male gorillas, whose mating competition happens at the physical level of the body. This form of competition, it is believed, lead to the extreme sexual dimorphism of that species—males are twice the size of females—and also to smaller testes. (A gorilla situation has one alpha male and two or three females, who normally only have sex with the alpha male—meaning, once the sex done, the male gorilla does not worry about the female immediately having sex with another male.) Bonobo males, however, have bigger balls than humans, and this is attributed their high promiscuity—sex is at the center of bonobo societies. (I have read somewhere that male chimps, which also live in multi-male, multi-female communities, have balls that are not much smaller than their brains.)

In America, sperm competition raises to the mind the negative image of "sloppy seconds." The minds of some Southern African societies, however, see it differently: sperm competition is called "brotherhood." The Southern African name, unlike the American one, retains the pro-social aspects of this practice.

Comments (14) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

What the hell, did the publishers of this book offer to pay the Stranger staff salaries for a year or something?

Posted by doceb on July 29, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Am I missing something here? How would the woman know which partner was the father?

Posted by Dougsf on July 29, 2010 at 12:55 PM

Didn't some research group find that the younger male gorillas who were turned out by the Alpha male would sneak back in to get with the lady gorillas, usually while the Alpha was fighting off a challenging almost-Alpha? Otherwise, wouldn't gorillas have eventually fallen victim to inbreeding, especially any genetic issues that fall/are carried on the Y chromosome?

Posted by Luckier on July 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM

sloppy seconds IS a negative though.

Posted by 34x42 on July 29, 2010 at 1:37 PM

Are you talking about the brotherhood of jackrolling?

Posted by slappytheweasel on July 29, 2010 at 1:55 PM

@2 The point is that which partner is "the father" is irrelevant.

@3 That's true, but it doesn't change the description of the social dynamics at play and how physiology reflects and enforces them. If caught, the paramours will almost certainly be killed. With bonobos, there's nothing illicit - the paramour simply waits his turn.

Posted by delwalk on July 29, 2010 at 2:09 PM

I think by "pro-social" you mean "homosocial"

Posted by Fistique on July 29, 2010 at 2:15 PM

@6 - I actually wasn't being rhetorical, I really was missing something.

Posted by Dougsf on July 29, 2010 at 2:32 PM

Mmmm a semen drenched vagina, how enticing.

What ev's

Posted by brandon on July 29, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Chuck,

"the pro-social aspects of this practice"

?!?!?!?!

Please enlighten us...

(The savage mind can be sooo fascinating.)

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on July 29, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Pro-social (as I understand it) is intended to describe the situation (in early human societies) where, as no-one knows the identity of the father and all the males have contributed sperm, all of the males are willing to provide for the child. That process leads to a closer, stronger social bond between the males of the group. It's the masculine aspect of the village raising a child.

Posted by Cynic Romantic on July 29, 2010 at 8:25 PM

While I'm sure it is pro-social in some situations, the horrendous prevalence of gang rape in South Africa demonstrates that it ain't necessarily so.

Posted by I have always been... east coaster on July 29, 2010 at 10:57 PM

@11 – Sounds like the modern urban black ghetto (72 percent of the births to black women are out of wedlock). How’s that communal sense of responsibility coming along with their men folk?

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on July 30, 2010 at 3:43 PM

@13:AFAIK ghettos are the antithesis of small, ancient villages. In ghettos the men who refuse to contribute to the society aren't beaten to a pulp, cast out and eaten by passing saber tooth tigers. The communities women aren't protected by the communities men. The threat to the members of a ghetto come from within the 'society', not outside.
And WTF does the mother's marital status have to do with the applicability of the theory to ANCIENT societies?

Posted by Cynic Romantic on July 30, 2010 at 8:38 PM