As times go by it seems that many individuals have problems with the opposite sex and equal rights movements happening more often now. Women in general don’t make as much as her counterpart even if they hold the same position in a corporation. It has made me wonder if this is social conditioning or are we actually hard-wired to be this way? There are species in which women are the dominant one within the species and males are there just to court and reproduce. Is it possible that everything we do is just to attract more partners? I don’t have every evidence possible, but it is something I have contemplated whether it is social conditioning or nature.
We will start with other ape and primate species in where one is dominated by female and the other by male. “There, In Asian mountains or lowlands forests, adult males lurked at the edges of female-run domains. The females invited them in to serve sexually. The males remained–desirable, dispensable –until the female lost interest in them. Then they were dismissed, replaced. In his compound, Wallen removed the breeders and introduced new males about every three years, the time it took for them to become irrelevant, for their claims to wane, for the frequency pf their copulation almost always female-initiated– to fade. In the wild they seemed to stay attractive only slightly longer.” ” Rhesus females are very xenophobia when it comes to other females,” Wallen said. “Introduce a new female into the compound and she’ll be hounded until she dies. But when it comes to males, females have a bias toward novelty.” Essentially in Rhesus society the women dominate the species and when courting happens and when it does not. The males are actually the passive ones and not the aggressors, but rather the females are.
Bonobos are female dominant, with females forming tight bonds against males through same-sex socio-sexual contact that is thought to limit aggression. In the wild, they have not been seen to cooperatively hunt, use tools, or exhibit lethal aggression.
Chimpanzees are male dominant, with intense aggression between different groups that can be lethal. Chimpanzees use tools, cooperatively hunt monkeys, and will even eat the infants of other chimpanzee groups.
Bonobos and Chimpanzees share close to 99% of their genome in common with humans, meaning that their genomes are more similar to that of humans than they are to that of gorillas. However, it may be that Bonobos, whose psychology is virtually unstudied relative to that of chimpanzees, are more similar to humans than are chimpanzees in how they solve various social problems (e.g. Hare, Melis, Woods, Hastings, & Wrangham, 2007). Such similarities may even be partly the result of shared and heritable neurophysiology that potentially regulates the social emotions of humans and Bonobos in similar ways (Hammock & Young, 2005). This is species that are really related to us as humans, so it makes me wonder if it is actually ingrained instinct and not just conditioning within the species. Within this species there are hierachies and active communication within the species; but it makes me wonder if this is how it was since each species started.
I read a book that are mind and what we do in our life could just be a way to attract partners. The peacock features it’s big and wonderful tail, but doesn’t neccesarily have any survival pruposes. The argument was that are big proportinal brain doesn’t neccesarily help for survival; rather it takes much energy for any purpose for survival. I wrote about this in another article just click here.
As times has passed and many of human socieities have perished; from what I understand many if not all socieities have been patriarchy dominated. So it makes me wonder if we are like the Chimpanzees in that sense; or is it that thru conditioning for hundreds of years it has been embeded in are subconscious mind and just became a social norm. I understand there are women right movements such as “The first gathering devoted to women’s rights in the United States was held July 19–20, 1848, in Seneca Falls, New York. The principal organizers of the Seneca Falls Convention were Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a mother of four from upstate New York, and the Quaker abolitionist Lucretia Mott.1 About 100 people attended the convention; two-thirds were women. Stanton drafted a “Declaration of Sentiments, Grievances, and Resolutions,” that echoed the preamble of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.” Among the 13 resolutions set forth in Stanton’s “Declaration” was the goal of achieving the “sacred right of franchise.”
I am putting this in the context of sexuality and courting; from experience I have noticed that when a women wants to attract a male she becomes submissive and the male becomes the dominant one. This doesn’t neccesarily mean women are passive and just sexual objects; ir’s just observations and seeing that social norms also makes this behaviors appropiate. It could be the opposite way if we change are conditioning; it would be different. One thing is for certain I belief women and males balance one another out and work better together; in cultures such as buddihism they call this male and female enegies. Or you could also see it as Ying and Yang; if you put both sides together it becomes whole so I belief that without one another things wouldn’t be the same.