No abstract

Although girls and women in many societies avidly participate in sports, they have been traditionally underrepresented compared with boys and men. In this review, we address the apparent sex differences in sports interest and motivation from an evolutionary perspective. First, we demonstrate that females' underrepresentation generally reflects lesser interest, not merely fewer opportunities for engagement. Moreover, there is mounting evidence that male and female athletes generally differ in their motivation, specifically their competitiveness and risk taking. Second, we examine the functional explanations for sports. We argue that the courtship display hypothesis applies mainly to females; the spectator lek hypothesis applies chiefly to males; and that 2 other hypotheses-the allying with coalitions hypothesis and the development of skills hypothesis-are important for both females and males. Third, we explore the proximate causes for the sex differences in sports interest and motivation. We show that although there is compelling evidence that prenatal hormones contribute, the evidence that socialization plays a role remains equivocal. We conclude by discussing key findings and identifying areas for further research.

Sports have received little attention from evolutionary biologists. I argue that sport began as a way for men to develop the skills needed in primitive hunting and warfare, then developed to act primarily as a lek where athletes display and male spectators evaluate the qualities of potential allies and rivals. This hypothesis predicts that (1) the most popular modern male sports require the skills needed for success in male-male physical competition and primitive hunting and warfare; (2) champion male athletes obtain high status and thereby reproductive opportunities in ways that parallel those gained by successful primitive hunters and warriors; (3) men pay closer attention than do women to male sports so they can evaluate potential allies and rivals; and (4) male sports became culturally more important when opportunities to evaluate potential allies and rivals declined as both the survival importance of hunting and the proportion of men who experience combat decreased. The characteristics of primitive and modern sports are more consistent with these predictions than those generated by intersexual sexual selection theories of sport.

No abstract

No abstract