Science Weighs In on Why We Rape, Kill and Sleep Around
Imagine for a moment that our most troubling behaviors—sexual violence, aggression, and promiscuity—are not merely social failures or moral transgressions, but deeply embedded biological legacies. This provocative idea lies at the heart of a fierce scientific debate that has raged for decades.
In the year 2000, the controversy exploded into public consciousness when biologists Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer published A Natural History of Rape, arguing that rape might be an evolutionary adaptation—a trait encoded by genes that provided a reproductive advantage to our ancestors 1 . Their claim sparked outrage and concern, with critics accusing them of providing a "get-out-of-jail-free card" for criminal behavior 8 .
This article delves into the science behind these claims, separating speculative theories from empirical evidence. We'll explore competing explanations for human behavior, examine a crucial anthropological study that tested these theories, and uncover how the very explanations we embrace might shape our society's morality. The question isn't just academic; it strikes at the core of how we understand human nature, responsibility, and the potential for change.
Evolutionary psychology asserts that many human behaviors reflect mental modules preprogrammed in the brain during the Pleistocene era, about 100,000 years ago 1 . According to this view, behaviors that enhanced reproductive fitness became genetically encoded:
Social-constructivist theories offer a dramatically different explanation. These perspectives emphasize contemporary social forces, power relationships, and cultural practices as the primary shapers of human behavior 8 .
They reject the notion that psychological categories like gender exist apart from their social context, instead highlighting the diversity and malleability of sexual behavior across cultures and historical periods 8 .
| Aspect | Evolutionary Psychology | Social Constructivism |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Influence | Genetic adaptations from ancestral environment | Social, cultural, and environmental factors |
| View on Rape | Possible behavioral adaptation for reproduction | Expression of power, domination, and cultural norms |
| Perspective on Change | Relatively fixed human nature | Highly malleable behaviors |
| Key Evidence | Cross-cultural universals, animal behavior | Cultural variation, historical changes |
For years, the evolutionary psychology argument seemed immune to disproof. Its proponents argued that behaviors advantageous 100,000 years ago might be maladaptive today, making direct testing impossible 1 . Without a time machine, how could we determine if rape actually enhanced reproductive fitness in the ancestral environment?
Anthropologist Kim Hill found an ingenious solution through his decades-long study of the Ache, a hunter-gatherer tribe in Paraguay that lives much as humans did 100,000 years ago 1 . Hill and his colleagues performed a careful cost-benefit analysis to calculate whether rape would have provided a net reproductive advantage to a 25-year-old Ache man during the Pleistocene era 1 .
Hill's team made generous assumptions toward the adaptation hypothesis: they assumed rapists would target only women of reproductive age (though in reality victims include children and elderly women), and calculated potential benefits based on the probability a victim would be fertile (15%), would conceive (7%), would not miscarry (90%), and would not let the baby die despite the circumstances of conception (90%) 1 .
| Factor | Impact on Reproductive Fitness |
|---|---|
| Potential Benefits | |
| Chance victim is fertile | 15% |
| Chance of conception if fertile | 7% |
| Chance of carrying to term | 90% |
| Chance mother raises child | 90% |
| Potential Costs | |
| Retaliation from victim's family | High probability |
| Social ostracization | High probability |
| Reduced cooperation in food acquisition | Significant impact |
| Overall Net Effect | Costs exceed benefits by factor of 10 |
The results were definitive: the costs of rape outweighed the benefits by a factor of 10 1 . As Hill concluded, "It just wouldn't have made sense for men in the Pleistocene to use rape as a reproductive strategy, so the argument that it's preprogrammed into us doesn't hold up" 1 . This groundbreaking research provided some of the most direct evidence against the notion that rape is an evolved adaptation.
Other evolutionary psychology claims have similarly faltered under scientific scrutiny. The much-publicized theory that men universally prefer women with a 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio has been contradicted by cross-cultural research 1 .
Anthropologist Elizabeth Cashdan found that in isolated populations in Peru and Tanzania, men consider hourglass figures sickly-looking and prefer heavier women with higher ratios (0.9) 1 . Even cross-nationally, preferences vary with women's economic independence—in societies where women are more economically dependent (Japan, Greece, Portugal), men show stronger preference for the hourglass figure, while in countries with greater female independence (Britain, Denmark), preferences shift 1 .
Intriguingly, research has examined whether exposure to evolutionary theories might affect how people judge sex crimes. In two studies, men who read evolutionary accounts of sexual behavior showed no significant change in their judgments of sex crimes compared to a control group 8 . However, those exposed to social-constructivist theories evaluated sex crimes more harshly 8 . This effect was mediated by perceptions of male control over sexual urges—social-constructivist explanations seemed to reinforce the idea that men can and should control their sexual behavior 8 .
| Theory Exposure | Impact on Judgments of Sex Crimes | Perceived Control Over Urges |
|---|---|---|
| Evolutionary Psychology | No significant change from control | Viewed as less controllable |
| Social Constructivism | Harsher judgments | Viewed as more controllable |
| Control Group | Baseline judgments | Moderate controllability |
Understanding human behavior requires diverse methodological approaches. Here are key tools researchers use to investigate these complex questions:
Studying contemporary hunter-gatherer societies like the Ache provides the closest approximation to ancestral environments, allowing researchers to test evolutionary hypotheses about adaptive behaviors 1 .
Presenting participants with different theoretical frameworks and measuring subsequent attitudes and judgments helps scientists understand how explanations influence moral reasoning 8 .
Large-scale surveys across multiple countries (like the International Sex Survey with over 82,000 participants) reveal patterns in behaviors and attitudes, highlighting both universals and cultural variations 2 .
Researchers examine physiological indicators (hormone levels, genetic markers) and their correlation with behaviors, helping disentangle biological from social influences.
Following participants over time, as seen in research on adolescents' social media use and sexual behavior, reveals how developmental trajectories and environmental factors shape outcomes .
Brain imaging techniques (fMRI, EEG) help identify neural correlates of aggressive and sexual behaviors, providing insights into biological mechanisms.
The evidence suggests that human behavior—including our most troubling actions—cannot be reduced to simple evolutionary imperatives. The Ache study delivered a powerful blow to the idea that rape is an evolved adaptation, while cross-cultural research reveals surprising diversity in what humans find attractive 1 . Rather than being prisoners of our genes, we appear to possess flexible minds capable of adapting to various social and environmental conditions 1 .
This more complex view of human nature suggests that behaviors like rape and aggression stem not from immutable genetic programming, but from the interaction of multiple factors—social norms, economic conditions, individual psychology, and yes, some biological predispositions. The science indicates that we are not doomed to repeat the behaviors of our ancestors; instead, we have the capacity to shape a more equitable and less violent society through education, social structures, and intelligent policy 8 .
Perhaps the most profound insight from this research is that the theories we embrace about human nature matter—they can influence how we judge others, how we structure society, and even how we view ourselves. The question of why we rape, kill, and sleep around may never have a simple answer, but science continues to provide increasingly nuanced insights into one of humanity's oldest dilemmas.
References will be added manually in this section.