With some help from bonobos, Heather Norum challenges the argument that male primates are violent by nature.
Men are violent. The media, society, school, and even my parents have all taught me this, so it must be right. They wouldn’t lie to me, and they couldn’t be wrong. Right? I mean, just look at all the apparent proof of it. Most convicted serial killers are men. Most convicted rapists are men. Domestic abuse? More men than women are convicted of that too.
I know a woman who works at a domestic abuse crisis center and without even realizing it she will talk about the victims as women and the abusers as men. She’ll be careful to use the term ‘abuser’ instead of ‘husband’ or ‘boyfriend,’ but somehow that abuser always ends up being a ‘he.’ She has been so socialized into thinking that men are violent, that without realizing it she has associated ‘abuser’ with ‘male.’ It doesn’t matter that the statistics used to show that more women are raped than men are flawed. She cannot see past her own belief that men are violent.
♦◊♦
Perhaps the most damning apparent evidence that men are violent is that it’s genetic. It’s the nail in the coffin: in primates, males are violent. It’s biological; it’s evolution. They can’t help it and we should fear them for it. Well I’m here to call bull-pucky on all of that, but especially the biological explanation. Not all species of primates have violent males, and I can prove it by introducing you to the bonobo.
Bonobos are a species of primate that live south of the Congo River. They are very closely related to the common chimpanzee, which live north of the river. The creation of the Congo River around 2 million years ago is probably what caused the separation of the bonobos from chimpanzees. The genus Pan (which chimps and bonobos are part of) split from the common ancestor it shares with the other great apes (and humans), and then split again into the common chimp, and the bonobo. While it is well known that the common chimp is our closest living relative; that title also applies to bonobos. I’ve provided a very simplistic illustration to help explain this relationship. I fully realize it is not a comprehensive depiction of the evolution of chimps, bonobos, or humans, but I hope it serves to help make it clearer.
My point in explaining how closely related we are to bonobos is to emphasize that in any discussion of how the great apes and humans are similar, we must include bonobos. If we assume that we can draw conclusions about human behaviour by observing the behaviour of the great apes, then that would apply to bonobos as much as it does to the common chimpanzee. In other words, if you’re going to argue men are violent because chimps males are violent, you have to take a look at bonobo males too.
Often when bonobos are discussed, they are used as an example of primates who are matriarchal, engage in homosexuality, and have females who engage in sex even when not fertile. The idea being that if bonobos do it, we can too! I would like to focus on bonobo males’ lack of aggression when compared to the common chimpanzee. To do that, I will discuss the nature of male aggression and violence in the common chimpanzee as a basis for comparison. So, on to the monkeys!
The common chimpanzee is known for living in very tight-knit groups who are very aggressive to outsiders. Groups of male chimpanzees will patrol their territory, attacking any outsiders who get too close. In fact, patrol parties from large communities have been recorded attacking, and conquering neighbouring small communities. They do this to gain greater access to food and females. Violence and aggression isn’t only directed toward outsiders. Even within a community male chimpanzees can be violent. Males kill unrelated infants in order cause females to become fertile again, allowing them to mate more often. Similarly, dominance struggles occur on a regular basis, in order to gain access to females. There’s no doubt about it; male chimpanzees are violent.
♦◊♦
So then, how do bonobos compare? Well for starters, males tend to be much more tolerant of infants. I am unaware of any record of males committing infanticide. If it happens, it isn’t common enough for researchers to have seen it and recorded it. When it comes to dealing with outsiders, bonobo males also appear to be less violent. There is no evidence that either male or female bonobos patrol their territory. What’s more, when individuals from different groups meet, they may groom each other and engage in sexual contact as a way to prevent conflict. This also isn’t to say that violence toward outsiders doesn’t ever occur. It just hasn’t been observed.
Within a community, bonobo males are far less aggressive than the common chimp. Bonobos, like chimpanzees, have a fission-fusion society. That means that members of a community will sleep and perform other social activities in large groups, sometimes upwards of 100 individuals, but will forage for food in smaller groups during part of the day. In chimpanzees, when the smaller groups come together at the end of the day the males reassert their place in the hierarchy by aggressive dominance displays. In bonobos, however, no such dominance displays occur. When the smaller groups of bonobos come together at the end of the day, they engage in sexual contact and grooming as a way to re-establish social bonds and avoid conflict. When conflicts do occur, both within a community and with outsiders, often they are solved without violence. Compared to the common chimpanzee, bonobos males are almost docile.
So, you may ask, what is the point to all this? We tend to lump all primates together when discussing how their behaviour can be used to explain human behaviour. We claim to be asking the question, ‘Are men violent?’ and then turn to the great apes, as a collective whole, for an answer. Except that’s disingenuous. What we actually do is assume men are violent, and then pick certain great apes to use as proof. We end up ignoring the evidence that shows that not all great ape males are violent, and more importantly, human men aren’t inherently violent either.
Two million years and a river separate bonobos from chimpanzees, and it resulted in completely different levels of male aggression. Imagine what the six million years and the world that separates humans from either of them could mean for supposedly biologically determined male aggression in humans. I think it means that using chimps as a biological basis for human behaviour is too simple. Humans are complex beings full of all sorts of emotions. Some days I think we may be more like chimps, with our wars and our violent crime. And some days I feel like we might be more like bonobos, solving conflicts by peaceful means.
More important than all of that, though, is what this means for the myth of male violence. We tell ourselves that men are violent and that we have all sorts of statistics and biological proof of that. Even though I know it is all false, I still hesitate for a moment when I see a strange man walking toward me on an empty street. For a moment it doesn’t matter that I know that men aren’t inherently violent; I’m worried that I might be wrong. It breeds fear, and fear so easily turns to hate. And if one half of the population fears and hates the other half, we won’t make any progress at all.
♦◊♦
Author’s Note: In the interest of full disclosure I will admit that I am not an evolutionary biologist or a biological anthropologist. If you are interested in further reading I’d suggest the Wikipedia articles on bonobos and the common chimp (they’re well cited) and the book Primates in Perspective.
—
photo: irene2005 / flickr
I agree that this debate would be more properly framed as a nature versus nurture discussion. The majority of human collectives are patriarchal in nature. The burden of survival of the group as a whole is placed more squarely on the shoulders of the males- ensuring a propensity for violent behavior which is largely vestigial in our current technology-driven societies. But these urges are still there and need expression of some form- and they are. Usually unfortunately. I would be interested in seeing what became of individual chimps and bonobos fostered from birth in the others’ encampments.
Well it’s thought that the reason bonobos are more peaceful because they evolved in an environment where food was more abundant. (Exactly how much more peaceful is debatable as we’ve discussed).
Boys horsing around isn’t violence.
http://reason.com/archives/2012/01/11/the-decline-of-violence
I once watched a pile of boys wrestling around and mentioned to a woman nearby that this was the primate at play. She sniffed and said,”The male primate.” I pretended to look more closely. “Yeah. I don’t see anybody knifing the absent.”
She was not amused.
Good article on the decline of violence: http://reason.com/archives/2012/01/11/the-decline-of-violence
Men are expected to be more violent than women. Somebody has to be when the circumstances call for it. What, you want the cheerleaders out in front?
No boys (or girls) horsing around isn’t violence. That was not the best example I could have given…but it was later in the evening. But my point in using that example (bad though it may be) is to highlight that society expects men to be more violent than women, which you agree with. But see, I see that expectation as a bad thing. When a society expects one half of it’s population to be violent, it can fear them. And that is most certainly not a good thing. Again Richard we are at the point where we probably won’t get… Read more »
In our society, men are programmed to have violence as an option, presuming they think the circumstances call for it.
Where one man differs from another is in his judgment of the circumstances.
Read of one Neolithic cemetery where half the skeletons showed signs of violence. Didn’t show who died bleeding out or who died of infection, peritonitis after a belly wound, for example, so there had to be more than half of the folks subject to serious or fatal violence.
Different judgements of different circs.
Yes! Yes! Perhaps the one thing I was trying to “prove” with this is that humans are not confined to their biology. So drawing direct parallels to either bonobos or chimps is not possible. We can’t use one primate to prove the behavior in another primate is genetic. Humans use their intellect to determine when violence is necessary. (Although there are outliers where people commit violent crimes and use violence as a weapon). But see here’s where I’d alter what you said a bit: In our society, men and women are programmed to have violence as an option, presuming they… Read more »
Heather. How do you know men are not biologically programmed to be violent? It’s actually not a useful concept, because being biologically programmed to be violent would seem to mean that’s what the guy does 24-7. What we have is people programmed to be violent when that seems as if it’s their best option under the circumstances. The circumstances vary. You’re a Viking on a slave-raid. You’re a Slav facing the Vikings. You’ve been attacked. The next country has lebensraum and doesn’t want to give it up. You have lebensraum and don’t want to be massacred so the country next… Read more »
” How do you know men are not biologically programmed to be violent?” – You caught me out on my use of the English language. My last sentence in the previous comment should have been written more like this: This still doesn’t mean that men are biologically programmed to be more violent than women (or other primates), anymore than my article means that men are biologically programmed to be more peaceful than women (or other primates). “If we say primates are programmed to use violence when it seems appropriate–to them–we cover all the bases.” – ah yes, but I think… Read more »
All primate males are violent in certain circumstances. Some are more so than others. Inside the western civilization cocoon, it may seem those circumstances are gone with the bad old days. Long as you outsource it to cops and soldiers and avert your eyes.
So bonobos are more or less violent than other primates….
Okay I’m trying to avoid responding on a personal level…but it’s a bit difficult. Again, Richard, you are presuming to know what my perspective is based on a few conversations. So let me rephrase a few things that you said to better fit the way I see things. All primate males and females are violent in certain circumstances. Some (such as chimps) more than others (such as bonobos). From my western civilization “cocoon” (that includes spending time in the Middle East and eastern Europe, as well as time studying cultures that most certainly do not qualify as part of this… Read more »
Point of clarification: Based on some of the comments, I think I may not have been clear. I am not trying to prove anything. It might sound odd, but it’s true. I’m not trying to prove that humans are like bonobos. I’m not trying to prove that bonobos are a “make love, not war,” primate species. I was trying to challenge the preconception that all primate males are violent. I was trying to challenge the idea that humans are like chimps. I was trying to point out that, while some understanding of human behavior can be gleaned from observing other… Read more »
Again, the bonobo’s ‘peace-loving’ reputation may just be a myth:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/07/30/070730fa_fact_parker?currentPage=all
Bonobo are probably no more or less violent then chimpanzees, both of which are far, far, FAR more violent then humans.
If you absolutely need to have a ‘peace and love’ ape, then it’s us. Yes, we have war, but in other species most of their mortality is due to territorial aggression within the same species. You can’t say that for humans.
Again, I think for some reason my article is being a little misunderstood. Possibly because I kept it simple to keep it short. But the link you provided isn’t going against what I’m saying. I’m not saying bonobos are a ‘peace and love’ ape. I deliberately avoided that term, as well as the term ‘make love, not war.’ You’ll note that when I mention infanticide hasn’t been recorded, I mention that it could still happen…it just hasn’t been recorded. Same with other aspects of their behavior. I’m saying, what has been observed is that they are _more_ peaceful than chimps.… Read more »
“This was directed at the general population…which does often say ‘oh men are violent, just look at chimps.’ ” Okay, then. By invoking the bonobo, what are you suggesting? That because there is an apparently less violent ape species, then that definitively proves that violence in humans has absolutely no genetic basis? At all? Ever? Lots of scientists like Stephen Pinker or Richard Dawkins, who believe that genetics has a contribution for violent behavior in humans, hominids and apes, do not think that violence is necessarily inevitable, inexorable or excusable. Violence is just one of the many capacities and predispositions… Read more »
“Violence is just one of the many capacities and predispositions that we have, along with the capacities for empathy, bonding, and cooperation, etc.” That is actually my point. I may not have articulated it well enough, but that is what I am trying to say. Pointing to a chimp and saying ‘it’s violent’ and then saying that proves human men are violent is too simple. I think the problem is that people are looking in the article for me to be trying to prove something. I’m not. I’m trying foster the idea that because bonobos have been recorded as being… Read more »
Heather
It appears bonobos are as violent as they need to be. They’re smaller than chimps. Do you think bonobos have always been only on one side of the river? Maybe this is their last refuge. What if somebody builds a bridge? As I said, we need a badass referee to keep the two apart so the bonobos can be an example to the perpetually adolescent flower children.
Which, of course, is a metaphor for human history.
“Do you think bonobos have always been only on one side of the river?” – Yes, actually. It is thought they evolved on that side of the river.
Actually, H. Sap is most like H. Sap. Watched some gorillas at a zoo. The Old Man was sitting on the side of a hill while the keeper pitched grapefruits toward him. The Old Man ate them. Number two was wandering around, at a distance. When a graprefruit went wide, The Old Man would turn his head and look at Number Two, or at least vaguely in his direction. Number Two wouldn’t get near the grapefruit. At some point, he’d been schooled pretty well. The paleoanthropologists usuall don’t say we’re like this or that great ape. After all, when one… Read more »
“Actually, H. Sap is most like H. Sap.” – Yes! This! Exactly this! This is part of what I’m trying to say with my article. We can’t point to one primate and say humans are more like that….because humans aren’t chimps, or bonobos, or gorillas…..they’re humans. I know that biological anthropologists don’t suggest our behavior is more like one ape or another…but this wasn’t directed at them. This was directed at the general population…which does often say “oh men are violent, just look at chimps.” Now, as to whether baboons could indicate how early hominids lived due to them being… Read more »
As a side note, I find it very interesting that we have individually identified different species as being more similar to humans behaviourally. For Richard (and Ardrey) it’s the baboon. Evan pointed out some similarities between the gorilla and humans. I pointed out the bonobo. Many people look at the chimp and draw the conclusion that we’re like them.
I think we all have a tendency to look at the great apes and anthropomorphize them a bit. We see traits that we recognize in human behavior and then we draw the conclusion that is where the human behavior came from.
I would say wolves are more similar behaviourally to us then any of the great apes.
A lot of biologists would agree, or at least recognize the wolf as a model for the type of adaptation required to exploit the ecological niche that human’s exploited.
One of the most important things that recommends wolves as a behavioural model for humans is the fact that they exhibit pair bonding. Like we do.
Also the bonobo reputation for peacefulness may be greatly exaggerated.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3353342/Bonobos-not-all-peace-and-free-love.html
From what I’ve read, the idea that bonobos aren’t as peaceful as they seem comes from observations of them in captivity. But it’s also been suggested that the reason bonobos become more aggressive in captivity is because of the way food is regulated. But yeah as for them hunting other monkeys and so on, so thanks for pointing out that article. I didn’t mean to suggest bonobos are completely peaceful. It’s just difficult to examine all the details in an article without it becoming boring. I mostly just wanted to highlight that they had peaceful interactions with each other. –… Read more »
“But yeah as for them hunting other monkeys and so on, so thanks for pointing out that article. I didn’t mean to suggest bonobos are completely peaceful.” Prior to research like Jane Goodall’s, scientists and laypeople stereotyped the common chimpanzee as being “completely peaceful” and living in some communal utopia, uncorrupted by violence. Now that those romanticized portraits about common chimpanzees are dashed, it seems that we have transferred those notions to bonobos. ” I mostly just wanted to highlight that they had peaceful interactions with each other.” Okay, so what then? Common chimpanzees have peaceful interactions with each other.… Read more »
Interesting point about wolves. I hadn’t heard that before. Although, I do have to ask, when you say ‘pair bonding’ are you referring to monogamy? Because that’s not a universal human trait.
>Because that’s not a universal human trait.
Pair-bonding is social monogamy which is distinct from genetic monogamy. Humans are socially monogamous.
Like other socially monogamous animals, males go through hormonal changes when their mate is pregnant(once it’s in our hormonal profile that makes it about as universal a trait as you can get). Although there still is extra-pair sex, humans _do_ pair bond. (In fact our genetic monogamy is fairly high at 90%.)
Ah, okay. I misunderstood what you were saying. I just wanted to make sure you weren’t suggesting that all human societies were arranged with pair-based monogamous relationships. That’s all. 🙂
What is it with this thing?
Most paleoanthropologists, looking for clues to early hominids–closer to being like us than are chimps or gorillas–look at the baboon troop for ideas of how various forms of hominid or early man may have lived. Not the forest apes.
See Robert Ardrey on the subject, “African Genesis”. Later work may have rearranged the lineage of H. Sap, and the Australopithecus. Basic concepts still seem valid.
I picked the chimp and the bonobo because they are our closest extant relatives. As such the chimp is often pointed to as the basis for comparison (by run-of-the-mill people), and the bonobo is largely ignored. I wanted to highlight that. Also, I apologize if I did not make it clear in the article….but I wasn’t trying to say that humans are more like bonobos or chimps. I was just pointing out that if you’re going to compare humans to the other great apes, you need to include bonobos into the discussion. Also, Ardrey’s “African Genesis” is from the 1960s,… Read more »
Bonobos will get along just fine until the chimps want their territory, or want to eat them.
What we need is a referee. Big and mean enough that even the chimps have to back off. Then the bonobos will be okay.
Chimpanzees are actually unusually brutal for the great apes; the best analogue I see for human males is the silverback gorilla, who is calm, collected and a good leader, but will f*ck you up if you threaten him, his troop, or his kids.
True about chimps being brutal…I just hear humans compared to them often. Or rather, I hear people claim that all primates are violent and then point out the chimp as the most extreme example of an otherwise ‘universal’ trait. And seeing as that doesn’t work…I figured I’d point to their direct opposites. As for human males being closer to gorilla males…maybe….although what you described is one ideal of a human man. It reflects the ideal of a human man as head of the household and protector of his family. I’m not saying that’s a good or bad thing. I’m just… Read more »
When it comes to domestic violence woman are just as abusive as men. Woman abuse children more than me, yet we rightfully don’t generalise all woman as abuse and as violent, why does society do the same to men?
You said – “We rightfully don’t generalise all woman as abuse and as violent, why does society do the same to men?” I think part of it is to do with fear of physical size, on average. (Though not directly related, it’s interesting that the difference in size between female and male bonobos is smaller than the difference in size between female and male chimps.) I think the assumption is that if a woman tries to harm a man, he could use his size to fight her off. If a man tries to hurt a woman, she won’t be able… Read more »
Hmm. So far all I am getting from this article is that humans are most like the chimps, and have lived in a similar fashion since so long ago that it is irrelevant if the set up was ever different. And and two women a week are killed by former/current partners. Sure, crime against men, like domestic violence and rape, are under-recorded. So is crime against women. Shame and guilt features just as much. Going to war as a collective – well, it is only relevant since women have received a right to vote, surely?…
You said “humans are most like the chimps,” – And I don’t think that’s what the article was saying. Or at least that’s not what I tried to say. I was trying to say that simply saying we’re more like chimps, or we’re more like bonobos is too simple. We’re like both of them. It’s just sometimes we may seem more chimp-like and sometimes we may seem more bonobo-like (anyone up for a Roman orgy? hahaha). You said: “so long ago that it is irrelevant if the set up was ever different.” – This brings up an interesting point that… Read more »
“Going to war as a collective – well, it is only relevant since women have received a right to vote, surely?” This is another interesting point. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that (in fairly recent western history) women have always been apart of war, even if they weren’t the ones making the decision whether it would happen or not. Plus, war is not something that’s voted on by the public – either the President sends people in (as what tends to happen now), or in the past Congress voted on it. So women having the… Read more »
Excellent point about not leaving out the bonobos when comparing humans to other primates. I suspect that one reason that bonobos are left out of many discussions is because of an American cultural propensity to be much more comfortable talking about violence than about sex. I would guess that 90% of the time if someone is talking about bonobos, the topic is homosexuality, masturbation, or recreational sex. The only things I heard about bonobos before this article have to do with their sex lives. I was thinking at the start of the article, “why is she talking about bonobos? Does… Read more »
“I know nothing about chimpanzee sex, but I know that Jane Goodall discovered that they go to war and even eat other primates once in a while. Chimps are violent and act in movies, and bonobos have lots of sex. That’s the division you have to break through.” – part of that is also to do with the fact that there are just fewer bonobos out there. Also, bonobos weren’t discovered until fairly recently (the 1920s), so the custom of bringing chimps back from Africa had already taken hold. Though, obviously, not for movies. I definitely their sexual behavior is… Read more »
You said: “When humans go to war against other humans, it’s the collectives themselves that go to war, not just the individuals, and not just the males.” Yeah I just want to be clear that the reason I refrained from talking much about female chimps, bonobos, or humans was to keep the article focused. Plus, if I were to talk about female bonobos I’d end up talking about how they’re matriarchal…and I wasn’t trying to focus on that aspect of their behavior. Plus…since it’s the Good Men Project, I figured I’d focus on the males. 🙂 But yeah, the collective… Read more »