This thesis assessed whether rape is an adaptive mating strategy. which was naturally selected for in our ancestral past. It investigated a number of constructs. namely: fertility value; victim-offender relationship; socio-economic status; rape proclivity; actual sexual aggression; and sociosexual orientation. There were two types of studies: studies 1-3 involved archival data, e.g. the use of criminal statistics. and studies 4-7 assessed participant data, e.g. rape attitudes. Study 1 found that fertility value was related to rape prevalence, as was reproductive value. (...) In addition, offenders with a nonreproductive sexual preference tended to rape a victim with a low FV. and offenders who committed a secondary offence tended to rape a victim with high FV. Study 2 found that there was a smaller number of offences committed against strangers and partners, and a larger number committed against step-relatives and acquaintances. More rapes were committed by low status than high status men. even when the base rate was accounted for. Study 3, showed that there was a relationship between the population gender ratio and rape prevalence. However. the covariable population density was positively related to rape prevalence. Study 4- found that there was more disapproval of a depicted rape committed by a low status offender. A low status offender who raped a victim with low RV attracted more disapproval. Study 5 showed that marital rape was disapproved of more than both stranger and acquaintance rape. Individuals with a short-term mating strategy disapproved of rape more than those with a long-term strategy, and a long-term strategist disapproved of a marital rape less than a short-term strategist. Study 6 found that those who possessed a promiscuous ideology perceived their future life to be limited, in particular the likelihood of being happily married. There was no relationship found between perceived future life and sexual aggression. In study 7. it was found that those who had a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation were more likely to have asymmetrical bodily traits. and that the right hand 20:40 digit ratio was significantly related to actual sexual aggression. Overall. there was partial support for rape as an adaptive mechanism. but the studics wcre also consistent with a by-product explanation of rape. (shrink)

The question raised by this volume is “How successful is naturalism?” The question presupposes that we already know what naturalism is and what counts as success. But, as anyone familiar with the literature on naturalism knows, both suppositions are suspect. To answer the question, then, we must first say what we mean in this context by both ‘naturalism’ and ‘success’. I’ll start with ‘success’. I will then argue that, by the standard of measurement that I shall identify here, naturalism is (...) an utter failure. (shrink)

Genes are ‘selfish’ in that they make organisms whose behaviours are shaped, necessarily, to benefit their genes. But altruism and selfishness as we usually think of them have little to do with ‘evolutionary altruism’ and ‘evolutionary selfishness', and the use of these phrases has given rise to much confusion. The most pernicious is the false conclusion that individual altruism is impossible unless it has been shaped by group selection. In fact, human altruism and morality are shaped by genes because individuals (...) with these capacities have a fitness advantage. The advantage may come from sexual selection, social selection, or the advantages of a capacity for commitment, as well as from cooperation, and kin selection. Ironically, morality may be a metaphor so powerful that it inhibits careful thinking precisely because our brains are wired by natural selection to see the world in terms of good and evil. (shrink)