June 26, 2008
Mad Science, Or the Perils of Reporting Evo-Psych
Beth Skwarecki in Bitch Magazine:
Whether it’s lions fathering all the cubs in their pride, or human males getting a pass for cheating on their girlfriends, males sleeping around rarely make the news—it’s the natural order, after all—unless the article is happily touting the genetic advantages a male gets from spreading his dna around.
But when female cheetahs were found to do the same by a Zoological Society of London study, the study’s words about “promiscuous” felines were quickly outnumbered in Google’s index by the phrase, “cheetahs are sluts!”
Study author Dada Gottelli was quoted thus: “Mating with more than one male poses a serious threat to females, increasing the risk of exposure to parasites and diseases. Females also have to travel over large distances to find new mates, making them more vulnerable to predation.” Sounds like a cheetah-specific version of certain sex-ed curricula: Don’t sleep around, girls, or you’ll catch lots of diseases and the male cheetahs won’t respect you in the morning. Male cheetahs, however, aren’t “promiscuous”—they’re creating a healthier gene pool.
Not too surprising, then, that most of the coverage glossed over the evolutionary benefit of promiscuity for both male and female cheetahs: Multiple cubs by multiple cub daddies increases the likelihood of genetic diversity—a definite positive for a threatened species. Furthermore, the study noted that the rates of infanticide in cheetahs are much lower than in other big-cat populations, likely because male competitors don’t know which offspring might be theirs. But why let the facts slow down a good headline?
Posted by Robin Varghese at 10:45 AM | Permalink










Comments
Bam!
One has to wonder how inevitable all of this is. In a culture where "scientific" is one of the highest words of praise you can apply to anything, the reading public will desperately want to read 'science' that conforms to and reinforces their various beliefs.
God help me, but I just can't shake the feeling that most people are far too dumb and/or passive to engage in the kind of careful self-criticism contained in this article, so this is just going to be an immutable truth about our society.
It seems to follow that, under a free-market system, this kind of journalism will, um, reproduce more successfully than responsible journalism.
The only thing regrettable about this piece is that it's published in "Bitch". Good on Bitch for doing so, but this makes it reeeeal easy for the aforementioned stupid/passive people to dismiss it as "radical feminism". This mofo should be in the New York Times.
Posted by: Nick Smyth | Jun 26, 2008 11:35:53 AM
"males sleeping around rarely make the news"
Tell that to Eliot Spitzer.
Posted by: Jared | Jun 26, 2008 12:36:36 PM
Post a comment