In this blog post, we will look at rape from a biological and evolutionary psychological perspective to see if it is a behavior that was formed as an adaptation for reproduction in the process of human evolution.
“Adaptation” is a basic concept in biology that refers to the process of changing a living organism to be more advantageous to its habitat. Adaptation is one of the important factors for organisms to survive in the environment. Examples of adaptation include changes in the color of an animal’s body and the structure of its legs, which enable it to quickly escape from predators. When most people think of adaptation, they only think of changes in the structure and color of the body, but in reality there are many more things. Adaptation is a comprehensive concept that includes not only changes in the appearance of living things, but also behavioral patterns and physiological changes.
In the book I’m going to introduce today, “Darwin’s Table,” the Gould and Dawkins teams are divided into two teams and have a heated debate on the topic of “Is rape an adaptation?” In this article, I’d like to share my argument on this debate that the two teams couldn’t finish. This book deeply explores the complexity and multilayered aspects of adaptation while vividly conveying the biological debate.
In the book, the Dawkins team strongly argues that “rape is an adaptation” and the Gould team argues that “rape is not an adaptation.” The Dawkins team says that rape is an adaptation for male reproduction from a purely scientific perspective. In response, the Gould team argues that rape is a byproduct of human behavior and that there is insufficient evidence to support the idea that rape is an adaptation. After this, the two teams begin to discuss adaptation in a broader context, with the Gould team being criticized for applying adaptation too easily.
Jang Dae-ik, the author of the book “Darwin’s Table,” argues that rape is adaptive after watching the debate. He uses obesity as an example to explain this argument. During the hunter-gatherer period, it was difficult for humans to find food, so they learned how to find food, which became very advantageous for survival and reproduction. And this system was an adaptation. However, with the recent surge in high-calorie foods, biological changes have not been able to keep up with rapid environmental changes, leading to the disease of obesity. And here, the author argues that just as obesity, a type of adaptation, cannot be avoided, rape cannot be avoided either. And rape is an adaptation, not an instinct, so it can be prevented, similar to obesity. The author also says that the adaptability of any behavior is separate from right and wrong, and that nature is not judged by ethical standards, thereby preventing readers from bringing up ethical issues.
While I support the claim that rape is adaptive, I want to make it clear that this does not provide ethical justification. The biological concept of adaptation is descriptive, not prescriptive. Therefore, just because an action is adaptive does not mean that it should be socially accepted. Society must regulate behavior through ethical standards and legal frameworks, regardless of biological adaptability.
Like the author, I also believe that rape is adaptive. In this article, I will focus on the aspects of rape and reproduction. Here is why I think rape is adaptive. First of all, to conclude, rape increases the probability of male reproduction success. According to a professor at Stanford University in the United States, the semen of a man who has raped has a higher level of antibody-forming hormones than the semen of other men. This further stimulates the woman’s follicles and increases the release of hormones that induce ovulation, increasing the chances of fertilization of the sperm and egg. Ultimately, the probability of pregnancy through rape is more than twice as high as that of simple sexual intercourse with the consent of the woman and the rapist. This is conclusive evidence that rape is an adaptation for reproduction.
Now, let’s hear the other side of the argument. The other side argues that rape is not an adaptation for the purpose of reproduction in terms of the species. In terms of the species, it is not simply the number of individuals in the species that is important. This is because, no matter how large the population is, if there are many individuals with genes that are unfavorable for survival, the species can easily fall into danger. After all, what is important to a species is the quality of its genes. Do species that value the quality of their genes need inferior genes that are disadvantageous to reproduction and must be raped? Probably not. They would say that species do not need inferior genes and that it is incorrect to say that rape is an adaptation for reproduction.
But, should we really think in terms of the species? I don’t think so. Rape is not something that is done by the species as a whole, but by individuals, so rape should be interpreted from the perspective of the individual, not the species. Reproduction is usually achieved through sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, but for individuals who cannot reproduce in the usual way, the most efficient way to reproduce is rape. In other words, rape allows the individual to reproduce, which is difficult to achieve, and pass on its genes to future generations, increasing the probability of the species’ reproduction. This has the advantage of reducing the quality of reproduction but increasing the quantity of reproduction.
The other side will try to talk about the woman’s point of view. When a woman is raped, many problems arise. First of all, the woman becomes pregnant against her will and has to suffer during the long pregnancy. During that period, the woman has to endure the pain on her own, and after the child is born, she has to raise the child on her own or even worse, abandon the child. In the end, this is a tremendous pain for the woman. In addition, reproduction through rape causes problems after the child is born. In the past, children born through rape often starved to death or were abandoned. In other words, rape increases the probability of pregnancy, but does not guarantee that many offspring will be born.
I don’t think this argument is logical. First of all, it may not be an ethical expression, but when reproduction takes place, the male is the giver and the female is the receiver. In the end, what is important for reproduction is the male. Since it is important for the female to increase the probability of reproduction for the male who is leading the reproduction, the female’s pain and damage are not considered. In addition, the fact that the child is unlikely to survive is not a relevant issue. Rape is mainly used by men who cannot reproduce in the usual way. To them, the child’s survival rate is not important. They cannot easily pass on their genes to future generations unless they rape. In the end, they must pass on their genes to future generations even if the child’s survival rate is low, and that is why they choose to reproduce by raping.
So far, we have focused on the issue of reproduction and discussed whether rape is an adaptation. The pro-rape side first argues that rape increases the probability of reproduction, and therefore, rape is an adaptation. However, the opposing side argues that rape is detrimental to the reproduction of the species because the species does not want to leave inferior genes. In response, the pro-rape side argues that rape is for the individual, not the species, and that it is an effective way for men who cannot reproduce in the usual way to pass on their genes to their descendants. The opposition points out that rape is not something that is done entirely from the perspective of the individual when it comes to women, and that rape does not increase the chances of a child’s survival. However, the pro-side again talks about the roles of men and women and concludes the discussion by emphasizing the importance of rape for men who are not ordinary.
To summarize, the pro-rape side argues that rape is an efficient method of reproduction from the perspective of the individual, while the anti-rape side argues that rape is an inefficient method of reproduction from the perspective of the species, which makes genes inferior. However, through this debate, I have become more convinced that rape is logical from the perspective of the individual and that rape is an adaptation.
