A 5 page essay that contemplates the sociobiology perspective on human reproductive strategies. The writer explains this concept, which is that males are attracted by female fertility and females are attracted to males with power and wealth. Then, the writer discusses the sociological repercussions of this idea. Bibliography lists 1 source.
Reproductive Strategies - October, 2003 properly!
In recent decades, some scientists have suggested that there is a biological basis for differences between human male and female reproductive strategies. Referred to as sociobiology, these theories posit that
there are basic tendencies in human reproductive strategies that are "hardwired," so to speak, a matter of genes, rather than cultural orientation. The following examination of this concept considers the
evidence to support this theory and its social implications. According to Davis, sociobiology proposes that males, in general, are older than their mates. This preference is supposedly biologically predetermined
before it maximizes the male chance of procreating successful (Davis, 1998). In other words, it is argued that males, in preferring younger women are expressing a desire to ensure that
"their seed is scattered on the most fertile ground" (Davis, 1998, p. 374). Likewise, female, presumably, prefer older men. In so doing, the sociobiology viewpoint is that women are
expressing a preference for mates who possess more material advantages as age increases the likelihood of greater a mate having greater wealth and prestige, which, in turn, increases the likelihood
of their offspring being able to survive and prosper (Davis, 1998). These preferences, some scientists argue, express fundamental differences in male and female reproductive strategies that go beyond culture
and are "written in biological script," which suggests that they are inescapable and should, therefore, manifest within a wide variety of sociocultural practices (Davis, 1998, p. 374). While this
perspective is widely evident in literature, this concept is most closely associated with the work of David M. Buss (Davis, 1998). Drawing his conclusions from 37 cultures, Buss argues that