Quote of the Day
Despite considerable cultural differences, a striking uniformity is argued to
exist in human preferences for concealing sexual intercourse from the sen
sory perception of conspecifics. However, no systematic accounts support
this claim, with only limited attempts to understand the selective pressures
acting on the evolution of this preference. Here, I combine cross-cultural and
cross-species comparative approaches to investigate these topics. First, an
analysis of more than 4572 ethnographies from 249 cultures presents sys
tematic evidence that the preference to conceal mating is widespread
across cultures. Second, I argue that current anthropological hypotheses
do not sufficiently explain why habitual concealment of mating evolved in
humans but is only seldom exhibited by other social species. Third, I intro
duce the cooperation maintenance hypothesis, which postulates that
humans, and a specific category of non-human species, conceal matings to
prevent sexual arousal in witnesses (proximate explanation). This allows
them to simultaneously maintain mating control over their partner(s) and
cooperation with group members who are prevented from mating (ultimate
explanations). I conclude by presenting a comparative framework and
predictions to be tested across species and human culturesYitzchak Ben Mocha
June 7, 2020
Why do human and non-human species conceal mating? The cooperation maintenance hypothesis | Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Interesting.
I didn’t read the paper in detail, but it appears to me he is ignoring a significant subculture. There are lots of people who video their sexual activities and post the video on the Internet. There are sex clubs in all western large cities. At these clubs’ people have sex with their spouse in front of other people. They also have sex with people not their spouse in group settings. If this were an evolutionary beneficial behavior, why would people seek out others and places to defy the norm?
I agree that this is far from mainstream. And I have often wondered why people seek seclusion. Growing up on the farm it was common to see the cattle, cats, and chickens mating. It just did not make sense to me that people were so private about it. There was no emotional damage to any of the animals. And it was my understanding chimp, monkeys and other primates mated in public. So, what is going on with humans?
If Mocha’s hypothesis is correct, it’s a restriction created by men for their benefit. One would then expect women to be more inclined than men to engage in public sex. I don’t believe this is the case. On the other hand, women are much noisier during sex than men. This lends credence to the idea that they have an evolutionary bias toward getting attention when they are highly aroused.
I’m glad Mocha put some thought into it. His hypothesizes are far better than anything I came up with. I’m not entirely convinced they are correct, but they are worth discussing and testing.
They weren’t so private when everyone were peasants with only one bed for the whole family. Going back further, I suspect that hunter-gatherers slept in one big pile near the fire and surrounded by dogs. It was also a thing among royalty that the consummation had to be witnessed for the marriage to be valid.
Read or at leadt scan the paper. The author claims that even primitive societies practice seclusion.
Agreed, some societies have consummation observation, but I think it is a one-time thing, not a usual occurrence.
I suspect this is downstream of the mating strategy, alphas versus sneaky-fuckers.
Alphas (of both sexes) have lots of mating choices and the pack/society/culture supports this. They don’t have to bang in private.
Thing is, there are a lot more left-over people than alphas. They don’t have as many mating opportunities. So they’re the “sneaky-fuckers”: they go tumble with one of the alpha’s societally accepted mates when the alpha isn’t around. Obviously, they don’t want to get caught.
Since sneaky-fuckers outnumber alphas, by evolutionary democracy, hiding-while-you-schtup becomes the norm, while the desire to publicly fornicate is also present as alpha-presenting behavior.
Why didn’t this evolve in other mammals or at least in primates?
It actually does occur, Joe. Check out the behavior of cuttlefish, for example. Even wild horses and elk, where one bull allegedly controls the harem, have mating that occurs outside the general public, initiated by beta males hanging out on the fringes of the herd.
It did. In gorillas, the troop silverback has dibbs on the ladies. But there’s only one of him, and he can only be in one place at a time. Both male and female gorillas get out of sight to do some extracurricular mating.
Interesting. The author of the paper didn’t do their homework.
I found the general Wikipedia article about the zoological practice of harems, dominant male behavior and “kleptogyny” while the dominant male is distracted.
Happens in red deer and elephant seals, too. Also, whenever the Navy pulls out of homeport, there are suddenly a lot of hot women in the clubs with untanned bands of skin around the left fourth finger.
All that seems to ignore the emotional part of the mating ritual for humans.
Animals are mating because of instinct.
Humans have an emotional connection akin to PTSD that comes with mating. This is exampled by the fact of how many people kill each other over “cheating”. Regardless of how many people enjoy being exhibitionists.
That emotional connection between man/woman is what holds families together as a unit. The basis of all civilization.
The facts are God created love for humans. (For animals, that behavior is mostly jealousy.) That bond gives us the ability to endure eminence hardships together.
That sharing of love is something we feel one for another. It’s not for anyone else. Thus, we do it privately.
That love is God’s love for his creation. Regardless of how man sullies it.
We may act like animals. But were not. Were so much more.
Science needs to catch up with God on this one.
I think you’ve strayed from the original point of “why is the norm to go somewhere private to have intercourse, regardless of culture”. We’re not talking about cheating.
My hypothesis is that the sneaky-fucker tendencies support the cross-cultural norm of private intercourse, while there are still an inclination to dominant male/female presenting behavior (whether you are dominant/alpha or not) that aligns with Joe’s observations. Remember, we’re the sapient (thinking) species, but we’re also sentient (feeling), and not all those instincts have a rational basis.
As for God, I’ll adapt something I tell my Scouts: The Scout Law is not something that everyone does naturally, on every point, all the time. You don’t need need something to tell you what you’re going to do anyway. You need something to challenge you when doing so is difficult.
Similarly, God wouldn’t have had to lay out the Ten Commandments (and all the other commandments the Jewish faith has in the Torah and Talmud, inherited to the Christians) if they were going just do it anyway. There’s no divine commandment to eat on a regular basis, for example, lest THE LORD strike you down with a wasting. So, when God tells us “לֹא תִנְאָף Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery”, He wouldn’t have had to say it if we didn’t need to be told.
To bring this back to the topic at hand, the fact that God had to say it at all, as one of the Big Ten, means we have an inclination to do otherwise and He’d rather us not. So, we’re musing on the nature of those inclinations, whether they happen within the bounds of Holy Matrimony or a more Bacchanalian context.
“If this were an evolutionary beneficial behavior”
we humans engage in many behaviors that are not evolutionarily beneficial.
We humans are successful (if one calls it that) because we have bypassed or attenuated many natural selectors, allowing selection-adverse behaviors to expand. Our success can be brief, and natural selection can return suddenly and harshly.
The difference is likely there because all the other species either lack or have a poorly developed sense of self. Most animals live “in the moment”. Some humans do but the majority of people don’t just live NOW, they think about the future. And public procreation will affect how they are viewed by others in the future. It’s one of a number of important ways humans are different from all other species.