Discuss evolutionary explanations of gender roles.

(8+16)

AO1 Mate strategies

Evolutionary psychologists suggest that there are differences between men and women as they are subject to different selective pressures. Males do well to mate as frequently as they can and select women who are more fertile (young) and healthy - smooth skin, glossy hair, red lips and thin waist
are all indicators of youthfulness and healthiness, and add up to what we see as 'physical attractiveness'. Women have evolved different strategies to maximize their chances of sexual reproduction. As a women spends nine months, as well as a costly egg, on creating a child, she must be careful to choose a mate whose genes are healthy and whom will be committed to her during pregnancy and child rearing. Females therefore tend to value qualities such as, high status, health, and resource potential when selecting a mate.

AO2 

There is empirical evidence from by Singh (1993) supporting the evolutionary theory of gender development. Singh used questionnaires to find that men are attracted to women with a low waist to hip ratio and that this is related to child bearing potential. The findings suggest that men are more attracted to women who appear to have low waist to hip ratio as this is related a more fertile woman with child bearing potential. The findings support the theory’s assumption of that men have a selective pressure of being attracted to women with child-bearing hips in order to ensure reproductive success, and thus increase the internal validity of the theory.

AO2 

There is a large body of evidence supporting this theory, including that conducted by Buss, who found that men value physical attractiveness more than women, whilst women value earning potential and status in prospective mates. In all 37 cultures studied, women preferred an older partner. This supports the theory that men search for fertility, whilst women value resources and status. As Buss’ study drew information from 37 cultures, the results gained possess high cross-cultural validity; showing that the traits desired by men and women are universal rather than culturally specific.

AO1 Division of labour

The evolutionary theory by Kuhn of gender development suggest that gender appropriate behaviours are innate and are as a result of pre-programmed genes through natural selection. The role division may have evolved because women would have spent most of their adult life either pregnant or producing milk or both; if a woman spent time hunting, this would reduce the group's reproductive success. However, women could contribute to the important business of providing food by growing vegetables, milling grain, making clothing and shelter, and so on. Not only does this complementary division of labour enhance reproductive success but it is also important in avoiding starvation - a further adaptive advantage. Kuhn and Stiner (2006) suggest that this gender division of labour might actually explain why humans (homo sapiens) survived, whereas the Neanderthals
(homo neanderthalensis) did not. The Neanderthal diet was mainly animals, and men and women both hunted

AO2/IDA

Another key criticism is that evolutionary explanations are speculative, i.e. they do not have a firm factual basis. For example, the appearance of gender-related division of labour may be a plausible explanation for the disappearance of Neanderthals, but we have no direct evidence. Other theories for their disappearance are equally plausible, for example climate change in Europe around 30,000 BC.

AO2/IDA

Both theories however, has been considered reductionist in that it does not consider other factors affecting the development of gender roles and only takes the view that the development of our gender is innate due to adaptive behaviours from our ancestral past. It ignores explanations such as social learning explanations such as reward or punishment. If a child is punished for displaying certain gender traits e.g. boy playing with girl toys and punished for the action, they will learn not to demonstrate that behaviour again. Thus suggesting that gender development is much more than just our evolution.

IDA

The theory is also extremely deterministic as it states that gender roles and our mate choice are all biologically inevitable and innate, therefore disregarding the role of free will in breaking stereotypical roles. For example, it cannot explain how women break the division of labour in modern society today and are no longer pre disposed to carry out domestic jobs, if division of labour is innate and essential for survival then we would see this more predominantly in modern society.