Chimpanzees Exchange Meat For Sex

the_therapist writes "A team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany, studied chimps in the Tai Forest reserve in Ivory Coast and discovered that chimpanzees enter into 'deals' whereby they exchange meat for sex. Among the findings are that 'male chimps that are willing to share the proceeds of their hunting expeditions mate twice as often as their more selfish counterparts.' They also found this to be 'a long-term exchange, so males continue to share their catch with females when they are not fertile, copulating with them when they are.'"

Comments

Same behavior in humans too

[grasshoppa]

We formulized it and called it marriage though.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[Jangchub]

+5 funny? That's robbery. +5 insightful.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[PachmanP]

We formulized it and called it marriage though.

Nah men formalized it and called it prostitution. Women started thinking about how to get more and put out less and that's how we got marriage.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[Gorobei]

Nah men formalized it and called it prostitution. Women started thinking about how to get more and put out less and that's how we got marriage.

Actually, it was probably the other way around: men formalized marriage in an effort to stop women sleeping around. Stability of the tribe, and all that (alpha males still get to sleep around, beta males get a better chance of their kid actually being theirs, the rest have no illusions.)

Sometimes I wish I could forget everything I've read on primate and avian mating patterns, it would make my life so much easier.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[tverbeek]

....and there is really only one reason to take a girl out on a date....

Because otherwise it gets really boring at the restaurant waiting for your order to arrive?

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[fractoid]

Always hard to confirm parentage if you don't have access to at least a basic lab.

Not if you trace maternal bloodlines.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[Gorobei]

Doubtful on the STDs: most animals use the "free sex approach" with minimal effect on fertility (actually, if an STD makes individuals infertile, that encourages sex with multiple partners.) Also, small breeding populations are not much affected by STDs: everyone is exposed, virulence is low. STDs go wild once you have big cities and travel (jets, wars, or pilgrimages, etc.)

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[YttriumOxide]

and there is really only one reason to take a girl out on a date....

It's comments like this that lend a strong argument as to why the stereotype of geeks never having girlfriends exists. Sex is great, and I enjoy it immensely, but I'd never consider it the "one reason" to be with a girl. It's great to share your thoughts with someone, have them share theirs with you; someone to laugh with, cry with; someone to look after you when you need it and give you the chance to look after them when they need it. My compatibility with a girl on ALL of these things is what I'm looking for when I go on a date with a girl, not just whether she'll put out at the end of the night.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[Plutonite]

Worldwide (citation needed but exists), women leave men at a higher rate when the last born child reaches 5 years old. Regardless of culture, religion, or other factors. The theory was that genetically that is when the child can gather it's own food and walk around and there is something genetic about it.

I'm sorry, but this is nonsense, you cannot use statistical inference in something like this, because the world is too small, and the factors too many. When you say "regardless of other factors" you have no idea how bad that sounds. "Other factors" considered by the survey, maybe, not in the real world. A single unkown factor, like intelligence of the father, or what the parents like to do on weekends, or relationships between jobs, can completely skew this thing one way or the other.
Also, the theory makes sense only to the extent of primates. Human beings maintain social status in a variety of ways, so the child reaching age 5 does not really mean much on its own. And yes we do have instincts to care for our offspring's welfare even when they are adults. I think it's more about people getting bored with each other, whether or not they have kids. Other studies have shown this too. The magic number is 4 years.

I never did the club hunting thing.

You didn't miss out on much. There are some great people who go clubbing to dance..etc with their friends. Very few 'nice' girls go to clubs to get picked up. They don't have to, and they don't want to. I've been approached by women in clubs, every half decent guy has.. and those women were always garbage. Or on a rebound. That sounds mean, but I'd be lying if I told you otherwise. And I live in DC so we party a lot.

But (in my experience), you still have to know them well- the anonymous stuff never worked for me. Too cold.

Congratulations, you are a decent human being who actually has feelings. Please collect your badge at the door, or pick up a free t-shirt from the table near the exit.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[kklein]

I've read up to 10% of children's dna do not match their fathers in many areas, so that's another strategy- happened to at least one friend of mine

Ugh, I can't say anything, but I really suspect this has happened with my brother's youngest. His wife got weird about the time he was born and then left him a little over a year later, out of the blue. The kid doesn't look like anyone on our side of the family, and has personality traits (like athletic ability) that neither side has. She cheated on him a bunch of times while they were dating, and then twice (that we know of) since they got married (they are, of course, divorcing now).

It's rough because, emotionally, he's already a wreck, and he has done most of the raising of the youngest and is a very proud parent. We all love that kid to death. But still... I just don't think he's "one of us."

I've decided to keep my mouth shut. Kid needs a family no matter what, and we like having him around. He shouldn't be punished for his mom being a dumb slut.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[mdwh2]

In my 50 years of experience there are three types of women
* Those who hate sex (common and really sad- seems to last decades)
* Those who are extremely promiscuous (uncommon but more common than you think)
* Those who enjoy sex and are reasonably or totally monogamous (uncommonly for a decade, rare for a lifetime)

Well, logically it seems obvious: either people hate sex or they don't. Either people are promiscuous or they aren't. Either they are monogamous or they aren't.

So you missed out people who aren't monogamous, but aren't promiscuous. As well as people who are monogamous and promiscuous (which in my experience are more common, simply because non-monogamous people are less common as a whole).

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[jacqdesign]

I can't resist making a comment... I think your comment is actually an example of why geeks don't have a girlfriend. A non geeks requirements for a girl are far less. Will they have sex with me? Yes. Do I want to have sex with them? Yes. Boom they got a girlfriend. Meanwhile here you are, the geek, wanting a girl to do that and have thoughts to share, similar sense of humor, to take care of you etc. That's a much longer requirement list to have out of the gate.

Having said that, your approach is probably the more rational one by far, and more satisfying when you do get the girlfriend, but geeks go for quality, not quantity. Non geeks, it's all about quantity till you hopefully find that quality.

I wanted to comment with something funny about how I have tried to buy many women a good steak dinner for that same reason, but somehow evolution clearly affected women faster then it did me. I kept trying, not very many women were buying. Sometimes evolution sucks.

Re:Same behavior in humans too

[Livius]

That only gives you half the parentage.

Oldest profession?

[Anenome]

Damn, we call it the 'oldest profession' and had no idea just how far back it went :P

Isn't this survival of the fittest?

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems an objective way to see if a potential mate has the capability of bringing home the bacon (sorry for the pun), thereby being a good indicator on whether the male could provide for a family that would result from copulation (unless they have safe sex ;) ).
If the male chimp doesn't have enough to share, he isn't probably very good at getting food - and you wouldn't want to propagate those genes. Did they check whether the chimps that shared the most also gathered the most?
So why is it being made to sound like prostitution, when it clearly is more like survival of the fittest - the female bangs the best male?

Nope, no "deal"

[ErkDemon]

Actually, the BBC summary is wrong.

Chimpanzees enter into "deals" whereby they exchange meat for sex, according to researchers.

... is, actually, almost the opposite of what the researchers found. They'd initially been trying to find evidence supporting that hypothesis, and had failed, because they'd found no evidence of any such transactions taking place.

What they did find was that, "amazingly", chimps who were generous with their food, and shared it whether a female was up for sex or not, ended up getting laid twice as often.
There's a whole range of possible reasons for this: it might be that females with high-meat diets get horny more often than those with dietary deficiencies, it might be that males who tend to share tend to be the better hunters, and therefore more physically fit and perhaps more attractive, it might be that by sharing, a chimp gives the impression of being more successful at hunting whether they are or not, it might be that males who show themselves to be more interested in long-term nurturing relationships are seen as better ones to have children with than the unreliable stingey ones ... and so on.

If we're going to anthropomorphise for a moment, I guess it means that wealthy, generous, "playboy" chimps who enjoy sharing their wealth with those around them and invest in long-term friendships have less trouble mating than those who don't have spare meat to share, or who hoard what they have for themselves.

I think that the anthopologists might like to make a study of two interesting concepts that appear to be relevant, here, but which seem to have eluded them:

1. "Making Friends", and
2. "Being Popular"

It's possible that the chimps might be more adept in these social skills than the anthropologists watching them.