THE BIG IDEA

Everybody Make Love—And War

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

They are primal urges, sex and violence, but they seem like polar opposites. They define almost every species, but humans seem capable of keeping them apart. Or maybe not. In their new book, "Sex and War," research biologist Malcolm Potts and journalist Thomas Hayden (a former NEWSWEEK writer) probe the biological basis for the two acts and argue that, in fact, they're more closely connected than we might think.

The Idea: As humans evolved from lower primates into small clans of hunters and gatherers, violent behavior grew indelibly linked with sex and reproduction. Simply put: those who did lots of the former got to have more of the latter. It's why, even today, football players tend to get more dates than math nerds.

The Evidence: Humans are the rare mammals that kill their own kind. Scientists trace this behavior back to our closest relatives, chimpanzees, which have been observed in the wild killing rival families and even eating them. Understanding the competition for resources— reason, in other words—turns out to be our Achilles' heel. It's why pigs and dogs, which are just as interested in sex as we are, don't kill each other for it.

The Conclusion: How does the cycle end? Women are the key. In cultures where women have power over how many children they have, Potts and Hayden note, the birthrate always falls. Over time, as the competition to survive goes down, our prospects for peace go up.

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Al Gore's Climate-Change Evolution
Al Gore's Climate-Change Evolution

Using emotion to convince people to change.

Heaven Can Wait
Heaven Can Wait

A new book promises proof of eternal life.

The World's Biggest Foods
The World's Biggest Foods

Monster edibles from around America.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: rdurand @ 12/11/2008 2:48:04 AM

    The root cause of war is finite resources or the perception of limited resources. Sex is not a resource. No one goes to war to have sex, sex itself simply isn't that important to society as a whole. It is only important to individuals to find a mate and reproduce but the concept of hostile courtship is actually counter to what any society allows. Back on war, almost anyone will go to war if they have too, in order to feed their children/grandchildren. Human beings are hard wired to think this way. If the basic needs of:food, water clothing and shelter (climate dependent) are denied human being's will fight to survive and that fight may be considered self defense depending on the circumstances.
    The reduction of population growth is an important modifier relative to the perception of finite resources and the prevention of war. Population growth reduction is something all societies are struggling with given recent runaway population growth and unfortunately runs contrary to almost all the societal rules written before the medicine changed society and multiplied population growth. But this article doesn't focus on the correct aspects before it comes to a conclusion...

  • Posted By: OLD GUY @ 12/11/2008 2:17:44 AM

    I think we are about done with evolving for the most part. It took better than 100,000 years to evolve just a little bit in the scheme of things. Our propensity for producing better methods of killing each other will win this race.

  • Posted By: flashbrite @ 12/11/2008 12:58:14 AM

    The challenge of our times is how to converge the immature commentary with truly profound discourse necessary to advance the ideals of our society. Immature commentary is borne of the assembly-line mentality which is plaguing every aspect of the press. The dirive for attention at all costs often leads provocateuers to frothfully spew hypothesis which have not been sifted through any sieve of reason or rationality. The only goal being to objectify attention-grabbing as the goal of information dispersal rather than informing and educating the audience and society at large. Somehow we as a society have to return "shaming" as a means of deterence so that those who would pretend to positions for which they have not fully vetted and cconstructed themselves will be branded (for what they are) as charlatans who would peddled unproven remedies on a vulnurable populace to its infinite hurt.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now