{"title":"Behavioural ecology of sexual autonomy and the case of protection against risky courtship","authors":"Jan Verpooten","doi":"10.1007/s10539-024-09963-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Evolutionary changes and interspecific diversity in sexual coercion and autonomy are often linked to indirect selection on mate preferences. Yet, this approach overlooks the small fraction of indirect selection in total selection on mate choice and assumes unnecessarily specific conditions in the recent ‘autonomy-enhancing’ risk-reduction model. This paper proposes a more parsimonious approach based on direct selection and basic signalling theory, incorporating ecological variables to better explain sexual biodiversity. Particularly, the spatial dimensionality of mating environments is emphasized for its role in enhancing sexual freedom through both diminishing monopolization and elevating escape potential from sexual coercion. Empirical evidence, ranging from waterfowl to humans, seems to better align with this ecologically constrained signalling perspective. Furthermore, it suggests that choosers keep coercion risk at ecological baseline by leveraging their escape potential. This repositions intriguing protective elements like bowerbirds' constructions as courtship features that have been bargained to respect sexual autonomy rather than enhancing it through indirect selection. It implies that courtship induced risks, such as reduced mobility, may in principle increase substantially precisely because they are offset by protective measures. Future research could reveal the prevalence of such risk-balancing strategies, advancing our understanding of mating dynamics. This work suggests new theoretical and empirical research avenues within the ecology of mating dynamics.</p>","PeriodicalId":55368,"journal":{"name":"Biology & Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology & Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-024-09963-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Evolutionary changes and interspecific diversity in sexual coercion and autonomy are often linked to indirect selection on mate preferences. Yet, this approach overlooks the small fraction of indirect selection in total selection on mate choice and assumes unnecessarily specific conditions in the recent ‘autonomy-enhancing’ risk-reduction model. This paper proposes a more parsimonious approach based on direct selection and basic signalling theory, incorporating ecological variables to better explain sexual biodiversity. Particularly, the spatial dimensionality of mating environments is emphasized for its role in enhancing sexual freedom through both diminishing monopolization and elevating escape potential from sexual coercion. Empirical evidence, ranging from waterfowl to humans, seems to better align with this ecologically constrained signalling perspective. Furthermore, it suggests that choosers keep coercion risk at ecological baseline by leveraging their escape potential. This repositions intriguing protective elements like bowerbirds' constructions as courtship features that have been bargained to respect sexual autonomy rather than enhancing it through indirect selection. It implies that courtship induced risks, such as reduced mobility, may in principle increase substantially precisely because they are offset by protective measures. Future research could reveal the prevalence of such risk-balancing strategies, advancing our understanding of mating dynamics. This work suggests new theoretical and empirical research avenues within the ecology of mating dynamics.
期刊介绍:
Recent decades have witnessed fascinating and controversial advances in the biological sciences. This journal answers the need for meta-theoretical analysis, both about the very nature of biology, as well as about its social implications.
Biology and Philosophy is aimed at a broad readership, drawn from both the sciences and the humanities. The journal subscribes to no specific school of biology, nor of philosophy, and publishes work from authors of all persuasions and all disciplines. The editorial board reflects this attitude in its composition and its world-wide membership.
Each issue of Biology and Philosophy carries one or more discussions or comparative reviews, permitting the in-depth study of important works and topics.