Comments on: Monogamy gene focus of Karolinska Institute

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:00:41 +0000

Drowssap,
About the “how would the trait have survived until now” debate. A few more ideas. Maybe it was hidden in a portion of the population, like in this diagram. One possible explanation for that: it was an evolutionary hammer-and-anvil that would have kept men either fighting to pass their genes on or to fail. Evolution, in this view, was never a leisure game. It would explain why the trait became socially visible during times when society afforded more physical comfort. It goes together with less physical activity, less conflict, less aggressiveness, and so on.
I’d really want to see the full brain mechanism behind the sex-aggression-stress interconnection identified. My prediction is that the sexual response was never a precise instinct in humans, like in other mammals, because New World primates have lost the olfaction-based gender discrimination organ and have increasingly relied on visual cues in order to identify food and mates. The reptilian reproductive brain system was already built on top of aggression, because it’s the basic animal dimension that ensures goal-directedness in fighting and preying. Reproduction was, in its rudimentary form, male-female dominance, which was built on the same rewarding paths as aggression and feeding.
The most interesting question would be now if New World monkeys increasingly relied on the visual system how did they manage to identify gender status in order to reproduce? Well, they didn’t have any special organ for that anymore like mice, they relied on the most basic male-female animal difference, which was aggression. They defaulted on aggression and combined visual identification with the old and waning olfactory system. This adaptation would have had enormous advantages for something very basic, like more foraging and hunting possibilies identified from the distance, far superior to the possibilities afforded only by the smelling sense. This means that humans no longer have a special error-free system in the brain to ensure that genders are emotionally identified either as 1 or 0, either as female (green light for reproduction) or male (green light for territorial aggression). It’s mostly the interplay between sight and aggression. Aggression probably regulates humans’ internal gender state, which influences how genders are emotionally identified, their “gender” status. (Note: I’m not talking about psychologists’ concept of aggression, I’m using the term in the animal research sense.) It explains why humans are not attracted to any individual of the opposite sex (like mice), but only according to preference inside a gender category, which is something more elaborate, more developmental, more depending on sight. So the rest would be the effect of imprinting and social gender segregation. This would also explain primates’ variety in sexual behaviour.

By: Drowssap

Drowssap — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:02:40 +0000

Evan
I heard Stephen Hawking talk about that on the radio today. Physics is way over my head but the collider experiment has got me excited… assuming we don’t get sucked into a blackhole. 😎

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:39:04 +0000

Drowssap,
They better speed up research, because next month the planet is getting sucked in by a black hole from under the Franco-Swiss border. It’s gonna make everything spaghetti. 🙂

By: Drowssap

Drowssap — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:03:53 +0000

Evan

Or he could sleep with as many possible women to prove himself that he is more attracted to them. The power of the environment cannot be underestimated.

Well you are right. There probably are gay men who have sex with more women than the average straight guy in an attempt to overcome their SSA. But I doubt a broad average of gay men would find that to be typical.

Something doesn’t add up in this story.

WIthin a year or so a scientist somewhere is going to announce that he found the sex attraction switch in animals. One chemical will probably create attraction to females, another attraction to males. At that point this whole debate is going to change forever. That’s my humble, nearterm prediction. 😎

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:37:15 +0000

If a guy finds men attractive chances are he doesn’t sleep with too many women.

Or he could sleep with as many possible women to prove himself that he is more attracted to them. The power of the environment cannot be underestimated. But you’re right, if you mean men who under no circumstances are able to be attracted to any female. I don’t think this type is very common. Maybe adults who used to have any form of GID during childhood or the most obvious “sissies.” But then, if scientists are right about the fact that the “gay brain” is more efeminised and less masculinised, gay men should be as attracted to women as straight women could be. Something doesn’t add up in this story.