'Discuss evolutionary explanations of gender Essay\r'

'According to the evolutionary interpretations of grammatical gender, the reasons behind perish gender roles and characteristics seen like a shot is collectable to the evanescent humble of genes through subjective picking from our ancestors who were able to madely survive and upchuck over 500,000 years ago. Natural pick is the process of physical and psychological traits universe passed downwards from one generation to other ascribable to it be advantageous to survival and reproduction.\r\nFor example creation with a goodr hand shape were able to toss spears crack when catch and therefore were able to successfully survive and manifold resulting in humans nowadays particularly work force having bigger and wider hands. A stem of natural survival is known as sexual plectrum. knowledgeable selection is the process of passing down traits both physical and psychological that ar an advantage for attracting matess for reproduction. The evolutionary supposition for gender believes that due to sexual selection gender behaviours, much(prenominal) as females being babe-rearing and males being workers occur.\r\nFrom these processes, evolutionary psychologists developed the hunting hypothesis. The hunting hypothesis states that the hands who were hunters during the evolutionary stages and were successful due to their strength, aggression and spatial skills were able to survive and pass on their genes. The weaker men who were little aggressive and had less spatial skills were unable to survive and reproduce meaning these genes died off thus resulting in men at once being to a greater extent(prenominal) aggressive, strong and having total spatial skills.\r\nAs char did non hunt and we more belike to be raising the children and affectionateness for others, they were less aggressive, strong, and had less spatial skills. kinda woman during these days had better communicational skills and according to this guess, it is due to this that w oman now are better at communicating than men and are usually in any case weaker and less aggressive. other possibility support by evolutionary psychologists as an interpretation for gender is known as the paternal investment speculation devised by Trivers (1972) which states that the digressions in the investment in a child and future reproduction are due to evolutionary differences.\r\nFor example, during the evolutionary ages men were likely to have sex with numerous women in determine to successfully pass on their genes. Therefore these characteristics were passed down in natural selection and finish be utilise to explain why men today tend to be far more promiscuous than women. In females, during the evolutionary ages woman searched and preferred men with good resources and genes for themselves and their offspring. evolutionary psychologists and Trivers believe that this is the reason for woman today being less promiscuous and being more careful when selecting a mate.\ r\n(AO2): verify for Trivers Parental Investment comes from seek carried turn taboo by dissolvedy kiss (1989) who sampled 10,000 males and females from 33 variant countries and asked what they looked for in a partner for marriage. Buss implant that women said they look for ‘good financial reports’ in men and men said they look for ‘physical attracter’ and ‘ juniorer females’. This supports Trivers surmisal as it leads register of woman placing an important on resources and men on physical attractiveness and young woman which may be in order for successful reproduction.\r\nBuss’s interrogation was highly reliable due to the large sample used and respective(a) countries participating. This made the reflect generalizable to a wide population. Buss also used questionnaires in his study which was a good data-based method as it allowed the possibility of a large sample, however the use of questionnaires exposes the research to social desirability bias as the participants may have answered the questions falsely in order to appear acceptable. This matters because this could mean the results found many not be valid.\r\nAlthough the results earmark a strong support for Trivers theory in explaining gender, the results apt(p) may not be a valid support, suggesting for research must be carried out in order to fully support Trivers theory of parental investment in explaining gender. Another supporting study comes from research carried out by psychologists in Lancaster University. They repeated the research carried out on Buss on a smaller sample development an online questionnaire with undergraduates and found that women chose wealth as the to the highest degree important in a mate and men chose attractiveness.\r\nThis supports the parental investment theory as it shows the evidence of the gender difference in men and women in cost of reproduction and commitment. This study is also highly reliable as the stu dy can be easily repeated and provide the same results. However due to the study being carried on only undergraduates the results cannot be generalised to a wider population of aged(a) adults and elderly.\r\nThis matters because although it provides evidence of the evolutionary progress of gender being seen today, we cannot be sure that the results given in this study was purely down to genetics rather than other factors such(prenominal) as individual differences. This suggests that more research must be carried out focusing on genetics in order to support Trivers theory as an explanation for gender. The evolutionary explanation of gender provides a valid approach to gender behaviours and characteristics which can be clearly seen today and back up in research.\r\nHowever this approach fails to consume other factors in gender such as psychological factors. For example women desiring men with wealth due to economic reasons such as less jobs, rather than the successful rearing of children. Also the evolutionary approach fails to provide an explanation for the promiscuity of women today or the men that do not want to have children. These situations are exceed explained by social approaches suggesting that a theory considering both genetics and social factors would be best in explaining gender.\r\n'