6,480
edits
Promiscuity: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Human female promiscuity
(Merge edit by 197.185.117.147) Tag: merged edit of another user |
|||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
<!-- too long, no structure, unreadable (Regarding the Himba tribe) some have noted that it seems implausible that a man would invest in his sister's children instead of his own unless the paternity certainty would be lower than 25% (as each child of his sister shares 25% of his genes) and that this seems unrealistically low.<ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327455603_Kinship_Human_Evolutionary_and_Biosocial_Approaches_to</ref> Amongst the Himba, approximately 48% of children aren't sired by their father and 70% of mothers have children from men other than their husband. At first glance it seems that Himba men should invest into their wive's 'children' instead of their sister's children. If we do a probability tree assuming that their's a 50/50 chance that a Himba man's child is his and that he has two of 'his' children by his wife and that his sister has two children he has a 100% chance in investing to 0,5 times his amount of genes if his sister's children inherit's his property (each child has 0,25 times his genes; combined they would have 0,5 times his genes); if his wife's children inherit then he invests (on average) ((0.5 + 0.5) x 1/2 x 1/2) + ((0.5 + 0) x 1/2 x 1/2) + ((0 + 0.5) x 1/2 x 1/2) + ((0 + 0) x 1/2 x 1/2) = 0,5 times his genes as well. So it seems that it is no more advantageous for a Himba to invest into his sister's children rather than his own. But consider this: let's take 100 Himba couples and assume that they each have two children on average, this would give you a total of 200 children. We know that 48% of children are not sired by their 'father' meaning that, of the 200 children, 96 of them are illegitemate. We also know that at least 30% of Himba women are faithful and do not cuckold their husbands. If we exclude this group of women we'd deduct 60 children from the 200 children and are left with 140 children. This means that, of the men that are cuckolded by their wives, 96 out of the 140 children are illegitemate(or 24/35 to simplify). Ergo, we can calculate how many times his genes a cuckolded Himba man will invest into on average if he has 2 children. That is equal to ((0.5 +0.5) x 9/35 x 9/35) + ((0.5 + 0)) x 9/35 x 24/35) + ((0 + 0.5) x 24/35 x 9/35) + ((0 + 0) x 24/35 x 24/35) = 0,24 times their genes. In other words, for 70% of Himba men, it is twice as condusive to reproductive success to invest in the children of their sister rather than the children of their wives and to have children with the wives of other men. --> | <!-- too long, no structure, unreadable (Regarding the Himba tribe) some have noted that it seems implausible that a man would invest in his sister's children instead of his own unless the paternity certainty would be lower than 25% (as each child of his sister shares 25% of his genes) and that this seems unrealistically low.<ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327455603_Kinship_Human_Evolutionary_and_Biosocial_Approaches_to</ref> Amongst the Himba, approximately 48% of children aren't sired by their father and 70% of mothers have children from men other than their husband. At first glance it seems that Himba men should invest into their wive's 'children' instead of their sister's children. If we do a probability tree assuming that their's a 50/50 chance that a Himba man's child is his and that he has two of 'his' children by his wife and that his sister has two children he has a 100% chance in investing to 0,5 times his amount of genes if his sister's children inherit's his property (each child has 0,25 times his genes; combined they would have 0,5 times his genes); if his wife's children inherit then he invests (on average) ((0.5 + 0.5) x 1/2 x 1/2) + ((0.5 + 0) x 1/2 x 1/2) + ((0 + 0.5) x 1/2 x 1/2) + ((0 + 0) x 1/2 x 1/2) = 0,5 times his genes as well. So it seems that it is no more advantageous for a Himba to invest into his sister's children rather than his own. But consider this: let's take 100 Himba couples and assume that they each have two children on average, this would give you a total of 200 children. We know that 48% of children are not sired by their 'father' meaning that, of the 200 children, 96 of them are illegitemate. We also know that at least 30% of Himba women are faithful and do not cuckold their husbands. If we exclude this group of women we'd deduct 60 children from the 200 children and are left with 140 children. This means that, of the men that are cuckolded by their wives, 96 out of the 140 children are illegitemate(or 24/35 to simplify). Ergo, we can calculate how many times his genes a cuckolded Himba man will invest into on average if he has 2 children. That is equal to ((0.5 +0.5) x 9/35 x 9/35) + ((0.5 + 0)) x 9/35 x 24/35) + ((0 + 0.5) x 24/35 x 9/35) + ((0 + 0) x 24/35 x 24/35) = 0,24 times their genes. In other words, for 70% of Himba men, it is twice as condusive to reproductive success to invest in the children of their sister rather than the children of their wives and to have children with the wives of other men. --> | ||
*Know whilsts this is certainly interisting to look at, it is unlikely that the conditions that allow women whom cuckold their husbands in the Himba tribe are widespread. For one, men are aware whose children are genetically their and those whom aren't (they are reffered to as 'omaka') and both women and men regularly engage in adultery (seemingly openly). The reason why the women whom cuckold their husbands enjoy greater greater reproductive success is two fold.<br>Firstly favouring genetic children over omaka is genrally frowned upon, this is the exception rather than the rule when it comes to how men deal with children in humans. Almost no other culture in history would condemn a man for favouring his own children over other children; the only modern exception to this would be regressive France that criminilized paternity tests. Secondly the actual fathers of the omaka often give food to the women they've had children with. So the greater reproductive success essentially comes from the fact that women recieve resources from both their husbands and lovers and would thus have healthier children and lower mortality rates.<br> Finally when a man dies, his sister inherits his possessions not his children; this essentially lowers the cost of him being cuckolded by other men as he invests less into his children. Interisting to note that most marriages in the Himba are arranged (the women have no say) and that 'love matches' (marriages were the women has married for love) experienced lower rates of extra-pair paternity. Now whilst it might be interisting to study, it would be fallacious to assume that simply because this one tribe that displays a chimpanzee like mating system therefore ancestral females were promiscuos, they were not.<br> The genetic and morphological presented above opposing rampant female promiscuity is reflective of millions of years of evolution and is a ''far'' better indicator of what ancestral females were like. Assertions about high female promiscuity may rather stem from an innate male sensitivity about paternity assurance and about losing status via getting cucked or [[mogging|mogged]].<br>It likely also owes to the tendency of women to engage provocative sexual advertisements (in order to attract male attention) in the absence of high standards of behavioral conduct (usually in view of gaining attention from men), and when norms prohibiting promiscuity degrade , as opposed to it reflecting unusually high rates of promiscuity among modern females. | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||