Evolutionary Psychology and Feminism

Abstract

This article provides a historical context of evolutionary psychology and feminism, and evaluates the contributions to this special issue of Sex Roles within that context. We briefly outline the basic tenets of evolutionary psychology and articulate its meta-theory of the origins of gender similarities and differences. The article then evaluates the specific contributions: Sexual Strategies Theory and the desire for sexual variety; evolved standards of beauty; hypothesized adaptations to ovulation; the appeal of risk taking in human mating; understanding the causes of sexual victimization; and the role of studies of lesbian mate preferences in evaluating the framework of evolutionary psychology. Discussion focuses on the importance of social and cultural context, human behavioral flexibility, and the evidentiary status of specific evolutionary psychological hypotheses. We conclude by examining the potential role of evolutionary psychology in addressing social problems identified by feminist agendas.

Sociosexual Attitudes, Sociosexual Behaviors, and Alcohol Use

“…The authors suggested that "from an evolutionary perspective, this gender difference stands to reason, since the number of partners that men want to have often disproportionately outweighs the number of partners they can actually obtain" (Webster & Bryan,p. 920, in reference to Buss & Schmitt, 1993). Findings from Penke and Asendorpf (2008) similarly found greater correspondence between sociosexual attitudes and behaviors among women, relative to men.…”

Gender differences in narcissism: A meta-analytic review.

“…These gender role beliefs both reinforce the division of labor via gender socialization practices and also lead to gender differences in cognition and behavior via the adoption of gender identities and self-standards, others' gendered social expectations, and the situational elicitation of hormones. The biosocial model (see Wood & Eagly, 2002) has been described as an alternative to, and in some regards a blend of, two other theoretical traditions often used to explain gender differences: (a) the essentialist perspective on gender (exemplified by evolutionary psychology; e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 2011;Pérusse, 1993)-which emphasizes men's evolved dispositions to participate in dominance contests and to control women's sexuality, along with women's evolved dispositions to select mates who provide more resources; cf. Eastwick & Finkel, 2008), and (b) the social constructionist perspective on gender (exemplified in sociology and anthropology; see Geertz, 1974;Mead, 1963;West & Zimmerman, 1987-which emphasizes gender differences as a local cultural phenomenon only, similar to the choice of clothing or hairstyles).…”

Comparison of Gender Differences in Attitudes, Expectations and Purposes of Marriage of University Students in Bandar-Abbas

“…On the other hand, Evolutionary psychology which provides a meta-theory to predict when and where gender differences or gender similarities are to be expected (D. M. Buss, 1995) demonstrates that it is expected that women and men differ in domains in which they have encountered periodically different adaptive problems during human evolutionary history. And there are similarities between men and women in all domains in which they have to deal with similar adaptive problems over human evolutionary history (D. Buss & Schmitt, 2011). Therefore, it is expected that women show a greater willingness to start a family.…”