While taking the biological anthropology course at the University of Arkansas, I have learned the extent of primate patterns and behaviors, most importantly, in relation to human behavior and social interaction. There is one primate that single-handedly relates to humans in terms of human characteristics such as sexual behavior, how they handle aggression, their psychological demeanor, movement, and socialization. The pygmy chimpanzee, also known as the bonobo, is this particular primate. The bonobo is known for their ability to resolve problems with in their life through sexual intercourse. I chose this topic because I find this fascinating, seeing as how I have already written a research paper on human development and sexual interaction between different human cultures. This paper investigates bonobos as incredible creatures in comparison to human beings in every aspect socially with conflict resolution and psychologically with how they mentally observe their surroundings with a lot of consideration of their environment. The bonobo, Pan paniscus, typically associate better with the opposite sex. I have found in my research, while reading “Cooperation in Primates and Humans”, that the males often form closer bonds with females (Kappeler 34). This could be because of the sexual aspect of it, or because females are dominate in this species. The maternal groups are primarily ran by the females when given the opportunity for food or order to the rest of the group. In human history, patriarchal societies were formed by nature and have evolved giving females more rights and opportunities now that modernization has taken place. That being said, humans and bonobos do differ this way.
Sexual behavior
Among Bonobos, sex is a maj...
... middle of paper ...
...omeone is sick and is in need of companionship, or nursing back to health help from one another. This is the closest thing that the humans have in comparison to the bonobos characteristic of grooming. Bonobos and humans have in common that mothers avoid being involved in any type of violence because they have children that are dependent on them. My research included Russell Ciochen and Richard Nisbett in “The Primate Anthology,” and in their notes, these mammals exhibit these behaviors over a period of time. They are a reliable source seeing as how they studied the bonobos for years at a time in the same environment. All in all the bonobos are incredible creatures in comparison to human beings in every aspect socially with conflict resolution and psychologically with how they mentally observe their surroundings with a lot of consideration of their environment.
...ape is mostly aimed towards women, it is known that bandits have also had men as victims. “Immigrants tell of nine gangsters who hurled a man off their train, then forced two boys to have sex together or be thrown off too.” (Nazario). While the wrongdoers in this situation are bandits, it is still a part that should be focused on because it demonstrates that women are not the only rape victims.
Chapter one of “The Bonobo And The Atheist” was rather interesting. De Waal focusing primarily on chimps studied morality. Now what is morality? Morality in short is having an understanding of right and wrong. Human beings have an understanding of right and wrong due to our beliefs and our teachings growing up. De Waal explains animals and humans do not share these common beliefs and he focuses his area of study on perhaps why they show signs of morality much like humans do. Humans are usually shaped around their specific religion, they have an understanding of god and the commandments so on and so forth. This is the case for me because I grew up in a very traditional roman catholic family. From a very young age I was forced to go to church
A Primate’s Memoir, written by Robert Sapolsky, documents the author’s time in Kenya while he studied the various behaviors of a troop of baboons. One of the key aspects of the book was the social rank that developed within the troop. Female baboons have a social hierarchy that is fairly cut and dry. The eldest baboons in the troop are considered the higher-ranking females, and as the baboons get younger, so to follows the string of dominance. The ranking for males was essentially from the strongest baboons to the weakest baboons. The baboon at the top of the social hierarchy was considered the alpha male. This social rank has huge implications for the troop in regards to which baboons mated with each other. If another baboon wanted to become the alpha male, then he would have to challenge the current alpha male to a fight, and win. The baboon’s distinct personality mixed with their instincts are the primary factors for where one lands on the social hierarchy. Another key aspect of the book was the strategies that took place when the baboons wanted to mate with another baboon. Similar to humans, the baboon males tried to impress the female baboons in a way that would make them want to mate. The rank of the male is considered to be one of the greatest factors contributing to what mate they end up with, because there is nothing more impressive than becoming a high-ranking baboon. Also, there were instances of lower-ranking baboons strategizing and forming teams with other baboons to become a higher ranking baboon for the mating possibilities. The baboons in the group are considered a patch-work of different troops, as it is common for one baboon to move to different groups frequently.
There are contrasts in tool kits used by different groups of chimpanzees, which seem to be a result of the environment in which they live as well as information that is shared by the group. For example, in 1973 it was reported that chimpanzees in Gombe did not use hammer stones, but those of Cape Palmas did. We will explore the tool use of Chimpanzees from the wild, including Gombe, Tai National Forest, and the Congo Basin---and contrast those with Chimpanzees in captivity in locations of Zoo’s both in the United States and abroad.
Quiatt, D., & Reynolds, V. (1993). Primate behaviour: information, social knowledge, and the evolution of culture. Cambridge [England: Cambridge University Press].
There has been an age long debate to whether or not primates have culture. This is based on the idea that primates may have certain behaviors that our taught rather than already being programmed in their minds biologically. Some would argue that a certain action that a primate does wouldn’t necessarily be something that primate was born knowing; but others would argue that it was something that was something they knew in their subconscious mind. Notable arguments that would be in favor of culture in primates would include their use of tools, how a primate eats, and how they interact; arguments against the theory of culture in primates would proclaim that a primate’s habits are determined biologically and not affected by outside sources.
...possibly is that female Neandertals chose human male mates due to the higher availability of food. These behaviors are also seen in modern primate species, whose behaviors are observed and can give an insight into past human behavior, which could be used as evidence to support the theory that competition between humans and Neandertals led to Neandertal extinction.
I recently learned about Social Scratch. Everyone scratches because it relives and irritation. We do it absentmindedly and so do apes. What I found interesting is that is become more of a social grooming. Unlike grooming where each ape is grooming each other silmutanesoiuly, in social scratching only the gromee is getting the benefit. These apes do this because of the “I know you know” on other words you scratch my back I scratch yours. (McGrew 136). I found this happening very often among the chimps more than the gorillas. I also noticed that they would pull their hair and they had many bald spots throughout their body. Why is that? I still haven’t discovered an answer, but I would like to know the reasoning behind
Celli, Maura L., Satoshi Hirata, and Masaki Tomonaga. "Socioecological Influences On Tool Use In Captive Chimpanzees." International Journal Of Primatology25.6 (2004): 1267-1281. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Apr. 2014.
...socially directed hormonal instructions which specify that females will want to have children and will therefore find themselves relatively helpless and dependent on males for support and protection. The schema claims that males are innately aggressive and competitive and therefore will dominate over females. The social hegemony of this ideology ensures that we are all raised to practice gender roles which will confirm this vision of the nature of the sexes. Fortunately, our training to gender roles is neither complete nor uniform. As a result, it is possible to point to multitudinous exceptions to, and variations on, these themes. Biological evidence is equivocal about the source of gender roles; psychological androgyny is a widely accepted concept. It seems most likely that gender roles are the result of systematic power imbalances based on gender discrimination.9
5. Kellert, S.R. and E.O. Wilson, editors. 1993 The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Darwin's theory of sexual selection is an intriguing one because it offers an explanation of human striving and cultural value systems. The theory is that humans who are more sexually desirable will have more offspring and thus their traits will be passed on to future generations to a greater extent than those of less sexually desirable humans. As opposed to Darwin's other theory, natural selection, those who are the best adapted to their environment will be more likely to pass on their genes, or, "survival of the fittest", you might call sexual selection "survival of the sexiest." The theory is intended to in part explain why, when humans diverged from other primates, the human brain tripled in size in just two million years. At first glance, this theory also seems to explain much of the motivation behind human culture and achievement. Upon closer inspection, there are some fairly conspicuous problems with it, especially when it is extended to describe not only human evolution in the distant past but it the present, but it may still be the most plausible explanation available to explain why humans mental capacities have expanded so far beyond those of our primate relatives.
The structure of this essay is based on animals and humans mate choice strategies and gender differences and similarities. These factors are intertwined with males and females reproduction success for choosing the right mate and bearing the parental cost involved in the offspring upbringing. (Trivers, 1972, 1985).Animal males from the evolutionary perspectives seek fertile, strong, females as a security for their offspring reproduction. These males’ strategize for their mate choice by advertising their masculinity as men ready for a mate. (Buss & Barnes, 1986; Buss, 1987).The female animals chooses mate base on their sense of security so they prefer males capable to protect and bear the cost of parenting with them.(Trivers,1972).In humans, females prefer wealthy men with high status as mate (Bjorklund & shackleford, 1999; Buss, 1992) whereas males prefer to date young attractive females who considers as fertile with the ability for genes reproduction.
From birth, one's sexuality is shaped by society. Cultures institute behaviors that are to be seen as the societal norms, which work to constantly reinforce societal expectations of how genders should act in relation to one another. Although some may argue that one's sexuality is an innate characteristic resulting from genetic makeup, there is a large amount of evidence pointing to its social construction instead. Through the power differences between males and females, established gender roles, and drastic economic shifts, society establishes sexuality and reinforces the behaviors that are expected of its citizens.
Traditional sex scripts of men and women create for a rape-supportive culture (Check & Malamuth, 1983). Rape is a logical extension of our sex role socialization process that legitimized coercive sexuality. Through these scripts men are taught to take initiative and persist attempts of sexual intimacy. Traits of dominance, aggression and violence are idolized (Martin, Taft & Resick, 2007). Women, on the other hand, are taught to not indicate their sexual interest or engage freely in sexuality. They should possess qualities of being passive, submissive and sexual gatekeepers (Martin, Taft & Resick, 2007).