Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Only a few nuts rape?
Message-ID: <2176@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Dec-84 13:49:39 EST
Article-I.D.: randvax.2176
Posted: Thu Dec  6 13:49:39 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Dec-84 03:38:36 EST
References: <10011@watmath.UUCP> <136@ihu1m.UUCP>, <10054@watmath.UUCP> <8162@watarts.UUCP>, <63@timeinc.UUCP> <8164@watarts.UUCP>
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 36

>       Bullshit, YOU HOPE.  It seems to me that men who raped would have
>       spread more genes around than others.  Bullshit, I hope, but not 
>       I believe.
> 
>                            Carlo @ the U of Waterloo

This is a very simplistic and naive view of evolution.  Reproduction
is the easy part; the key to natural selection is the ability for ones
offspring to survive.

Early man formed groups, much like what modern man does on a larger
scale.  Natural selection would work towards modes of behavior that
increase group cohesion, and NOT just towards brute-force reproduction.
A group that practiced violent behavior against some of its members
would likely demoralize and splinter, and its chances for survival
would be reduced.

It all gets a lot more complicated.  I've heard the theory that the
advent of organized force (i.e. armies), in which one group overcomes
another, meant that the successful invaders would rape and pillage
and the children of those rapes would continue the violent tendencies
of their fathers.  There is a falacy here; such warrior-children would
be more likely to get themselves killed in similar exploits, while the
real advantage goes to the more peaceful members of the invading group
who are more likely to survive and settle the conquered territory.

I'm certainly no expert in prehistoric anthropology, or evolutionary
biology.  But I think I know enough to see that there is little reason
to believe that sexual violence would bestow an evolutionary advantage.
On the other hand, a certain amount of sexual aggressiveness would
definitely be advantageous--in both sexes.  And if you don't know
why aggressiveness is NOT the same as violence, there is little hope
for you... but I'll try explaining it anyway.

		-Ed Hall
		decvax!randvax!edhall