The book Sex at Dawn is about the primitive origins of human sexual behavior. According to the authors, sex was a shared resource during the hunter-gatherer phase of human history; sex is said to not have been distinguishable from childcare, food, or group defense in terms of how communal it was (Ryan & Jethá, 2010). The authors argue that there is apparent bias in the discipline of evolutionary psychology that ignores the primal instincts of sexual behavior where hunter-gatherer culture has been rewritten to fit modern social constructs. The main theme of the book is that monogamy is a modern social construct that did not exist in primitive societies. The book offers a variety of evidence to prove the case that the human species is not adopted for monogamy. Evidence such as female copulatory vocalization, testicle size and sexual dimorphism, desire for sexual novelty, hidden female ovulation, and various sexual practices are said to point to polyamorous predisposition.
The authors also argue that during more primitive times, there was no intragroup competition for sexual mates because sex was not a scarce commodity. The more important factor was sperm competition compared to sexual selection, which is said to persist among remaining hunter-gatherer communities (Ryan & Jethá, 2010). The book implies that a standard model exists regarding sexual behavior among humans that tries to conceal the true nature. This standard model is said to support monogamy; while the book does not outrightly oppose monogamy, it does imply an effort to hide the primitive nature of human beings in favor of monogamy. In the standard narrative, the male is drawn to youth, health, fertility, absence of sexual past, and the possibility of future fidelity, which is interpreted as looking for a fertile, youthful woman with a substantial child-bearing period remaining. The female, on the other hand, is drawn to sign of wealth or social status and physical health which is a thinly veiled desire for a mate that will take care of her and children. According to the authors, current mating behaviors are not so much human nature as they are adaptations to the present social setting. The authors have supported their case with evidence delivered from a variety of sources such as academic books, newspaper articles, and peer-reviewed sources from as far back as 1978 to 2008. The advantage of this is that it appeals to both academic and non-academic audiences, but it is a pitfall if the goal is academic such as was with this book.
Analysis of the Book
The book has tried to confront standard theories in evolutionary psychology. The book does a good job of marrying various subjects spanning social science, neuroscience, and social science. The authors have presented evidence not used before in support of the theory. The writing style is flexible enough to even have pop-culture appeal. There were previous attempts to challenge the construct of monogamy, but none had delivered a case as robust as this one in such a relaxed style. Some have been brazen in their support for promiscuity, but the authors of Sex at Dawn seek to only reveal that which is hidden. By so doing, they are able to capture the curiosity of both proponents and opponents of the standard narrative on sexual behavior.
In earth history terms, the hunter-gatherer period was not long ago. This is why the term coined by the authors, “Flintstonization of history,” is so apt in defining what humans have done to whitewash the very foundation of human sexual behavior (Ryan & Jethá, 2010). People have believed the standard theory of sexual theory to the extent that it has been accepted that men are more promiscuous than women as they seek to spread their seeds far and wide; women, on the other hand, are believed to be “keepers” who seek to provide resources for their offspring.
Sex at Dawn seems to channel into the recent theme of deconstructing modern narratives. It is not far-fetched than other similar themes that seek to deconstruct traditional narratives on such constructs as gender by making the bold claim that they are “social constructs.” These traditional theories have always created privileged and victim groups, which is why the book should be lauded for seeking to deconstruct them. As an example, the theory of monogamy, although having the intention to bind every individual to one partner, has not produced desirable results in equal measure for both genders. In Western society, where monogamy is the prevailing custom, still men who stray and get multiple sexual partners are not as vilified as their female counterparts, who are considered unclean and given derogatory labels. A book such as this gaining mainstream popularity is a good thing that will be a win for the victim groups, in this case, women.
An interesting theme in the book is the constant allusion to primates such as chimpanzees and bonobos. It is no surprise since it is a book about evolutionary biology, but it is a good way to get the reader zoned into primal substance in a way that they cannot view a human being as anything more than a beast. The book uses considerable evidence from anthropology, evolutionary biology, comparative zoology to concluded that much of the modern sexual practices of monogamy are social constructs and have only been imposed on the modern human whose true instincts are more basal.
The book is riddled with biased reporting of evidence and makes problematic assumptions, and has many theoretical shortcomings. The authors of the book purport to only be revealing that which has been hidden from the light, but this is simply an attempt to appeal to both sides of the debate. It is true that in evolutionary terms, hunters and gatherers only existed a short while ago but claiming so is an attempt to belittle the progress that the human species has achieved over the course of time. By applying a linear scale to the civilization process, the authors expose themselves as not so neutral and do seem to exhibit a slight disdain for the modern man. The authors cling to the idea that there is an inclination towards promiscuity that is somehow suppressed when the reality is that some cultures practice polygamy, but that does not necessarily make them promiscuous anymore than monogamous cultures make humans predisposed to monogamy. For this reason, the book could give a distorted view of sexuality to the intellectually ignorant.
The other argument against the book is the authors’ foregone conclusion that there is a “standard narrative” in science about the sexual nature of man. The reality is that there is no standard narrative in scientific literature. The book has assumed that such a model exists and runs with the idea. The truth is, in as much as monogamy is the prevailing custom in the west, it is not the case around the world where other forms of standard sexual customs are practiced. Sex is a topic that creates plenty of debates; it is not hard to see why some people would be tempted to overinterpret the book. The authors have made the mistake of failing to avoid this very pitfall. An effort to question the foundations of sexual behavior is likely to elicit such accusations as favoring promiscuity and rejecting monogamy which is highly objectionable to puritans.
No doubt, Sex at Dawn has many weaknesses from several vantage points. Firstly, the original intention by the authors was to be published in academic publications such as the Oxford University Press, where they were rejected. It is not difficult to see why the book would be sneered at by academic sources because it also happens to be considerably ideological. Because of ideological inclinations, it is hard to come up with evidence that would please every reviewer. Academic reviewers would typically be unimpressed with sources such as newspaper articles. Despite the failure to impress academia, the book has achieved sufficient success in stirring debate and becoming a pop sensation at the very least.
It would be uncharacteristic of Sex at Dawn if it did not provoke one of the hottest debates pertaining to a book. Some critics called the book pseudoscience. The book was generally well-received in pop culture than in academia. It has been said that the authors did not have the credentials to make such bold anthropological claims. According to Ellsworth (2012), the book became a best seller and received plaudits from such personalities as Dan Savage. Some even called it the most important book about sex since Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior of the Human Make in 1948. Ellsworth does not hide her disdain for the book and describes it as not having achieved a “position of respect.” In another critique by Lynn Saxon (Saxon, 2012), she goes as far as writing a rebuttal book herself the cheekily named Sex at Dusk. Saxon dissects the book thoroughly and claims that it is ridden with errors, misunderstandings, omissions, and mistreatment of evidence. According to Ellsworth et al. (2014), the book is highly ideological, but many efforts have been committed to masking the ideology with nitpicked evidence. Saxon claims that the authors of Sex at Dawn did not have the credentials and were not consistent in their recount of evolution.
Conclusion
This paper has focused on Sex at Dawn, a quasi-academic book written in 2010 by Christopher Ryan and Cacida Jetha. It is quite an important book that seeks to challenge the stability of the prevailing model of human sexual behavior. The book makes bold claims that humans are more promiscuous than they like to admit and that monogamy has been used to conceal the real truth about human’s true nature. The book draws evidence from anthropology, evolutionary biology, comparative zoology to bolster its evidence. Some critique for the book has been offered; on the positive side, it has been observed that the book does a good job to challenge the norm, which the authors have labeled the “standard narrative.” It has been noted that this book is part of the wider “deconstructionist” movement that seeks to dismantle the prevailing theories that have stood for a long time. On the negative side, the book does not offer enough scientific evidence to back the claims and has been eviscerated by academic critics. Despite the weaknesses, the book is thought-provoking and can be described as one of the most important books of the past decade.
References
Ellsworth, R. M. (2012). Book review: The myth of promiscuity.Evolutionary Psychology, 10(3), 147470491201000. Web.
Ellsworth et al., (2014). Sex at dusk: Lifting the shiny wrapping from sex at dawn. Current Anthropology, 55(5), 647–653. Web.
Ryan, C., & Jethá, C. (2010). Sex at Dawn: The prehistoric origins of modern sexuality (1st ed.). Harper.
Saxon, L. (2012). Sex at Dusk: Lifting the shiny wrapping from sex at dawn. Amazon.