Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

chazwomaq t1_j4uxi9p wrote

Reply to comment by sheismagic4e in Biologically speaking, what makes men typically stronger than women? by Erratic_Noman

>Men are built to hunt and protect

Intrasexual competition is a more common culprit in explaining sexual dimorphism. Dimorphism correlates strongly with mating system across mammals, such that higher size dimorphism corresponds with more polygyny and male-male competition.

3

walkthewalk44 t1_j4w15lj wrote

How does competition create sexual dimorphism?

1

chazwomaq t1_j4w6v81 wrote

Where one sex (usually males) competes physically for the other sex, there is selection pressure for large size, musculature, weaponry like antlers and horns, territoriality, and aggression. The winners of these contests reap huge rewards in terms of mating (Bateman's principle), which is why sexual dimorphism is associated with polygyny. In monogamous species, there is much less incentive to invest energy into intrasexual competition.

3

walkthewalk44 t1_j4w9saf wrote

Thanks for the reply. Also I've been looking for an answer to my question and haven't found anything on it. Do you happen to know what would create the attraction for sexual dimorphic features such as fat deposition in females? I understand that they survived better in the past but how does actual attraction come into play?

1

chazwomaq t1_j5605rv wrote

You might want to look in Fisherian runaway selection and Zahavian honest signalling. Both are explanations for the evolution of preferences for sexually selected traits, but would take a while to write out here. Wikipedia is good.

Such traits don't need to offer a survival advantage to evolve. In fact, many examples probably offer a survival disadvantage.

1

Beginning_Cat_4972 t1_j69d63o wrote

Interesting point because humans are not particularly sexually dimorphic when compared to other animals, and even other primates. Sexual selection is often overlooked in evolution, but females play a large role in what traits are conserved and which are lost. For humans, parental involvement was favored over size/strength of males. This is why we pair-bond and are mostly monogamous with fewer offspring.

1

sheismagic4e t1_j51tbch wrote

Size is not a sexual dimorphism in the human species, male and female are relatively similar in size, there are actually many women taller than man. Size, which is linked to strength, makes/made a man go up in the competence hierarchy, which makes him more attractive as a mating partner, which in turn means that the genes responsible are passed on to the next generation.

−2

chazwomaq t1_j520xuv wrote

Humans do show size dimorphism (about 15%), albeit not as much as some other primates, and certainly not as much as elephant seals. There is also substantial dimorphism in upper body musculature relative to lower body, suggesting adaptations for fighting.

The rest of what you described is Darwin's male-male competition and female choice.

2

sheismagic4e t1_j525276 wrote

Thats a size difference in my eyes, due to a complex mating behavior humans developed over time and male physical aspects is one parameter that played/plays quite a significant role, which also indicates health.. likely the major aspects in mate selection on both sides. And could you please define what you refer to when using the term size dimorphism.

0

chazwomaq t1_j5609v2 wrote

Size dimorphism means a difference in size between the two sexes of a species.

1