C

Contexts for Men’s Specifically, reproduction and child-rearing often Against Women generate conflict between the sexes. Whereas men more than women pursue a relatively short- Rachel M. James, Todd K. Shackelford and term mating strategy, by which they attempt to Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford secure sexual access to multiple partners, women Department of Psychology, Oakland University, more than men pursue a relatively longer-term Rochester, MI, USA mating strategy, by which they attempt to secure resources for themselves and their offspring. One way in which men and women manage conflicting Synonyms sexual strategies is through physical aggression and ; an extreme manifestation of which Homicide; Intrasexual competition; Physical is homicide. However, men commit the majority aggression; ; Rivalry; Sexual coercion; Sex- of instances of intimate partner violence and of ual ; Violence homicide, cross-culturally (Daly and Wilson 1988). Additionally, men use sexual aggression against women to bypass female choice and Definition male–male competition. Similarly to physical vio- lence, men, more often than women, are the per- Evolutionary pressures on men and women result petrators of sexual coercion and rape (Knight and in sex-specific sexual strategies. Whereas men use Sims-Knight 2011). physical aggression to secure sexual access and/or Sex differences in violence perpetration to deter rivals, men use sexual aggression to min- emerge because of distinctive sexual strategies imize their investment for sexual access and to (Buss and Shackelford 1997). Men and women thwart female sexual choice. Men use distinct use aggression differently because of sex- forms of aggression against women, because, on differentiated minimum obligatory parental average, these behaviors conferred ancestral ben- investment and associated sexual selection efits that exceeded the associated costs. (Cross and Campbell 2011). Women, compared to men, invest more time and energy into their offspring, making women a valuable reproductive Introduction resource for men. Men, in contrast, invest much less in offspring (e.g., the physiological cost of an In the context of mating, men and women ejaculate and the time required to produce it). have engaged in a co-evolutionary arms race. Because women engage in most of the child-

# Springer International Publishing AG 2018 T. K. Shackelford, V.A. Weekes-Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_888-1 2 Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women rearing, for ancestral men to have been reproduc- (especially aggressive genres of porn; Knight tively successful, they must have outcompeted and Sims-Knight 2011). However, although it is rivals to secure the attention of high-investing important to acknowledge these individual char- females. Thus, our ancestors include those males acteristics and behaviors of sexually coercive who successfully used violence against rival men, those explanations do not engage ultimate males to gain sexual access to females. However, causes of sexual aggression. violence also may have been successfully inflicted To avoid cuckoldry and to assure exclusive on female mates, to thereby assure paternal cer- sexual access to a long-term partner, men’s use tainty. More specifically, ancestral men may have of physical aggression against women is associ- used aggression against women and thereby ated with male sexual jealousy, the age of the thwarted them from deserting or committing sex- woman, and sexual rejection. Additionally, ual infidelity and are likely to have been more men’s use of sexual aggression against women is reproductively successful as a consequence associated with the age of the woman, male (Buss 2014). Whereas it may have been ances- assessment of the vulnerability of the woman, trally adaptive for men to be physically aggressive and various individual differences in men (e.g., to combat paternity uncertainty or cuckoldry, disadvantaged men and specialized rapists who female aggression is less likely to have been are sexually aroused by violent or forceful sex). selected over evolutionary time. Given the invest- ment that women contribute to their offspring, women may have evolved mechanisms, such as Contexts for Men’s Physical Aggression greater sensitivity to fear (Cross and Campbell Against Women 2011), that motivate them to avoid involvement in physical violence. In fact, research indicates Although some researchers argue that partner kill- that women engage much less frequently than ing by men was not ancestrally adaptive and, men in extreme violence (e.g., homicide; Daly therefore, not selected over human evolutionary and Wilson 1988; Perilla et al. 2011). When history (Daly and Wilson 1988), other researchers women do aggress, this aggression is more likely argue that men have evolved specialized mecha- than men’s aggression to be nonlethal. nisms for partner-killing, designed to be deployed As with physical aggression, men use sexual when it would have been ancestrally adaptive aggression against women as a part of a sex- to do so (i.e., in the context of the threatened specific sexual strategy (Buss 2014). Sexual departure of a long-term partner; Buss 2006). aggression (e.g., rape) is one tactic men may use Specifically, Daly and Wilson (1988) propose to reduce the investment they trade for female that partner-killing is an extreme manifestation sexual access. By exercising sexual aggression of male sexual jealousy or “proprietariness,” and circumventing female choice, ancestral men unintentionally slipping from control to murder; may have secured increased reproductive success the killing of a partner would not have provided while contributing fewer resources to the woman sufficient reproductive benefits to the killer to who rears their offspring. Thornhill and Palmer outweigh the associated costs. Buss (2006), (2000) suggest that by sexually coercing women, in contrast, suggests that men have an evolved men may succeed in competition for mates with- psychology that motivates killing of a partner out having to be chosen by a woman or winning when killing produces benefits that exceed the male–male competitions for sexual access. In con- costs. Consistent with both competing hypothe- trast, nonevolutionary explanations of risk factors ses, homicide and intimate partner violence are for sexual coercion or rape suggest that men per- inflicted by men to deter partners from sexual petuate because they have rape-supportive atti- infidelity or defecting from the relationship. Phys- tudes, perceptual biases (i.e., believing that a ically aggressive and homicidal acts that men woman’s friendly behavior is sexual), high alco- commit against their female partners are often hol use, and high consumption triggered by sexual jealousy (i.e., stemming from Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women 3 paternity uncertainty or the threat of cuckoldry), infidelity results in cuckoldry, her partner invests the age of the female partner, and/or experiencing precious resources into a rival’s offspring. In romantic or sexual rejection. essence, women have evolved motivation to maintain their sexual autonomy, whereas men coevolved motivation to control their female part- Sexual Jealousy ner’s sexual behavior (Smuts 1992). To control female sexual behavior, male strategies range First, lethal or nonlethal violence is regularly from physical violence to vigilance. The most directed by men against their female partners in extreme form of violence, homicide, occurs most the context of male sexual jealousy (Buss 2000; often in the context of male sexual jealousy (Daly Daly and Wilson 1988). In fact, male sexual jeal- and Wilson 1988). In fact, men who kill their ousy is the most common cause of wife battery partners often do so because of suspected or dis- and a leading cause of uxoricide or wife-killing covered sexual infidelity, which embodies male (Daly and Wilson 1988). Although jealousy is a concerns with paternity certainty and cuckoldry. common experience among both sexes, women Additionally, partner-killing by men most often report that they would be more distressed by a occurs when the woman attempts to desert her partner’s emotional infidelity than sexual infidel- partner and the relationship; in which case, the ity; whereas, the opposite pattern is reported by loss of a reproductively valuable woman to a men (Buss et al. 1992). Specifically, men express rival motivates male proprietary aggression greater distress by the prospect of or the actual act (Buss 2014). However, partner-killing by men of a partner’s sexual infidelity than by a partner’s does not inevitably follow suspected or discov- emotional infidelity. These sex differences in jeal- ered female partner infidelity or desertion; men ousy arise because of differences in evolved sex- also use nonlethal violence to control their part- ual strategies that men and women pursue; each ner’s sexual behavior. sex has its own set of goals and means of Ancestral men recurrently faced the adaptive attempting to achieve them. In the conflict of problem of paternity uncertainty because fertili- interest between the sexes, women desire to zation occurs within women. Whereas women are secure long-term relationships in which they can never unsure that their offspring are genetically secure resources for themselves and their off- their own, men face the problem of being spring. However, women may sometimes “out- deceived into providing resources and care for a source” or copulate with other men to obtain rival’s offspring. Given that men cannot account higher quality genes for their offspring. If success- for their partner’s sexual behavior at all times, the ful, women are assured the resources they need possibility of cuckoldry increases as time spent and have secured better genes for their offspring. with one’s partner decreases (Buss 2000). To com- In the process, they will have successfully bat the threat of cuckoldry, male sexual jealousy deceived their long-term partner into raising and may have evolved as a mechanism of detection investing in offspring to whom he is not geneti- and as a motivator of subsequent (sometimes vio- cally related. Men, on the other hand, and relative lent) action (Buss 2000). Further, male sexual to women, have evolved an interest in sex with jealousy plays a key role in intimate partner vio- multiple partners and with lesser investment in lence (Goetz et al. 2008). Specifically, male phys- any one partner. To assure paternity, however, ical violence or aggression functions to punish or men may invest in a particular woman for the deter women from sexual infidelity; in these cir- long-term, in which case they are motivated to cumstances, violence against women functions as thwart her attempts at infidelity. Sexual infidelity an anticuckoldry tactic. Because women have by a man’s partner can result in the loss of time, evolved as the less aggressive sex (due to internal effort, and resources in his partner, which could fertilization and the need to protect reproductive have been spent securing a different mate that and child-rearing capabilities), men can exploit would have been sexually faithful. If her sexual women’s interest in self-preservation for their 4 Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women own reproductive gain (i.e., women’s fear of related to autonomy-preventing mate retention physical harm by men may stop them from behaviors. By using mate guarding tactics suc- deserting their partner, increasing their partner’s cessfully, men inhibit or restrict their partner’s opportunities to reproduce). The sexual jealousy sexual opportunities and stop them from arising from paternity uncertainty also manifests deserting, becoming more confident that they are in the most severe form of violence, homicide. For the sire of any offspring produced by their partner instance, unemployment may influence men’s (Buss and Shackelford 1997). However, in cases aggression against women in the context of poten- which the woman does abandon her partner, the tial cuckoldry. Men who lack sufficient resources risk of homicide increases dramatically (Daly and may be at a greater risk of cuckoldry than men in Wilson 1988). Women are most likely to be killed higher socioeconomic brackets (Buss 2006). One by their estranged partner within the first year after study found that of the men who killed their a break-up (Buss 2006). Thus, when nonlethal partners, 64% were unemployed at the time of violence does not prevent female infidelity or the homicide (Easteal 1993). Given women’s relationship defection, men may resort to homi- evolved interest in securing resources and sup- cide (Buss 2006). In such cases, a man might port, it is not surprising that men with fewer benefit from killing his partner, rather than simply expendable resources may be at greater risk of letting her go, because she may offer reproductive partner infidelity and cuckoldry. Although opportunities to rivals, while he may not be able to partner-killing is costly in terms of lost reproduc- replace the mate for his own reproductive tive opportunities and time squandered securing endeavors. Further, and in connection with an the murdered partner, the benefits of homicide earlier point, men who are unemployed kill their might sometimes exceed such costs, with the partners more often than men who are employed, result that selection favored male psychological and these same unemployed men are more mechanisms that motivates partner-killing, under inclined to kill or attempt to kill their partner particular circumstances (Buss 2006). when she breaks off the relationship with them Motivated often by sexual jealousy, men (Easteal 1993). This is because unemployed men attempt to stop women from deserting them typically lack the resources women desire and are through physical violence or killing. Male sexual less likely to secure a new mate in the future. By jealousy is a frequent correlate of such controlling eliminating their partner, these men could thereby behaviors and violence. Men use both nonlethal establish credit for their reputation (in certain cul- (e.g., verbal threats) and more severe (e.g., homi- tures) and retain the resources that would have cide) forms of violence to control a woman’s been allocated to the woman. sexual behavior (Smuts 1992); many of these behaviors can be described as mate retention behaviors. One class of these behaviors is direct Age of Woman mate guarding; while engaging in this form of mate retention, men physically guard a mate and The age of a woman predicts the likelihood she actively dissuade potential mate poachers. Direct will be the target of intimate partner violence or mate guarding also includes more explicitly dan- homicide. Young women are more likely to be gerous forms of control such as physical aggres- killed by their partner than are older women sion. Men do not exclusively direct their (Shackelford et al. 2000). Specifically, women aggression toward other men; violence as a mate aged 15 to 24 years, within the reproductive age retention behavior may include physical aggres- bracket, are most likely to be killed by their part- sion against their partner (Shackelford et al. ner (Daly and Wilson 1988). Women in the youth- 2005). Specifically, direct mate guarding, monop- ful, reproductive periods of their lives are more olization of time, and punishment for a partner’s valuable to men as mates. Younger women are perceived or actual infidelity predict female- more sexually attractive and desirable to men directed violence. In sum, violence is closely because youth represents or indicates their Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women 5 fertility, which is important in male mate choice These researchers also found that, among college- and ancestral male reproductive success. Addi- aged men who indicated they are more invested in tionally, males with a youthful and attractive part- their intimate relationships, anxious expectations ner gain social status from their mateship to this of rejection predicted their use of violence against valuable reproductive commodity. Given the their partner. In this context, it is possible that men motivation and interest to secure as mates respond anxiously and aggressively to rejection young, fertile women with high reproductive because they perceive that they have lost the value, male sexual jealousy should be especially opportunity to mate exclusively with a desired sensitive in the context of mateship to younger woman. Additionally, other researchers found women. Because younger women are more desir- that experiencing romantic rejection from a sexu- able to male rivals, male sexual jealousy motivates alized woman increases male aggression (Blake men to defend their partners from mate poachers et al. 2017). In this study, when men were roman- and sometimes motivates them to use aggression tically rejected by a sexualized woman against their partner to stop them from deflecting. (sexualized through clothing in a profile picture Men with younger, reproductive age partners are and in response to sex-related questions) via an more likely to commit violence against them to online dating platform, the men delivered more control their sexual behavior (Smuts 1992). severe sound-blasts to the sexually-rejecting Because of the reproductive damage a younger woman. Although these studies shed light on non- woman (relative to an older woman) can cause lethal aggression, sexual or romantic rejection her partner as the result of her desertion or sexual may lead to serious consequences, such as homi- infidelity, nonlethal and lethal violence are much cide. Consider desertion or abandonment, for more likely to be deployed by men against youn- example. Ending a relationship is, in effect, a ger partners than by men against older partners. permanent denial of sexual access and rejection Additionally, researchers have investigated of one’s previous partner. When a man’s sexual whether younger women are killed more often strategy is thwarted, discomfort and anger is than older women simply because younger expected to rise. Given how costly it is for a man women are mated to younger and more violent to invest in a woman only to be denied sexual men. The results of this research found that youn- access, male violence may have been ancestrally ger women are more likely to be killed across male adaptive in securing future mating attempts or in partner age groups (Shackelford et al. 2000). In ending a woman’s life to thereby deny rivals sex- sum, younger women are at greater risk than older ual access to that woman. women of intimate partner violence and homicide.

Contexts for Men’s Sexual Aggression Sexual Rejection Against Women

Sexual rejection may motivate men’s aggression US studies across the nation, criminal justice sys- against women. Specifically, nonlethal and non- tems, healthcare systems, and college campuses sexual aggression in response to denial of sexual indicate that men’s sexual aggression against access is a class of problems that women have women is a widespread and prevalent problem faced recurrently over human evolutionary his- (Knight and Sims-Knight 2011). From an evolu- tory. One study indicated that male rejection sen- tionary perspective, men may use sexual aggres- sitivity is associated to perpetration of intimate sion against women to circumvent female choice partner violence (Downey et al. 2000). In partic- and thereby to invest fewer resources for sexual ular, men who indicated a lower threshold for access. By avoiding male–male competition for rejection negatively perceive and overreact to female sexual access and reducing the time, their partner’s ambiguous or negative behavior, energy, and investment spent courting a desired heightening their risk for responding aggressively. woman, men may increase their sexual access by 6 Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women use of sexual aggression. Because women have an reproductive benefits ancestrally. Symons (1979) evolved sexual strategy in which they pursue suggested that rape is a by-product of adaptations long-term or committed and high-investing designed to secure sexual access from consenting males, men who use sexual aggression against partners. Specifically, deviations of male psycho- them expose them to undesirable circumstances logical mechanisms for desire for sexual variety/ (i.e., rearing an offspring without receiving novelty, psychological sensitivity to mating oppor- resources from a mate). One study suggests that tunities, desire for uncommitted and minimal men’s sexual aggression against women is investment short-term mating, and the general extremely upsetting to women (Buss 1989) and inclination to use physical aggression may inadver- much more upsetting than men estimate. Buss tently and as a by-product lead to instances of rape. (1989) found that among college-aged women, The mate deprivation hypothesis of rape, sexual aggression was the single most upsetting which proposes that men who have little or no act a man could commit out of 147 potentially sexual access to desirable mates may be more upsetting actions. Given the conflict of interest inclined to use sexually coercive tactics, has between the sexes, a strategy of sexual aggression received inconsistent empirical support or rape may have evolved in men, while antirape (Lalumière et al. 1996). Other researchers suggest defenses have co-evolved in women. that there are several types of rapists (McKibbin Rape refers to the use of force or the threat of et al. 2008), which may shed light on why there force to secure sexual intercourse (penile-vaginal has been inconsistent support of the mate depri- penetration) without a woman’s consent (Buss vation hypothesis. McKibbin et al. (2008) identify 2014; Thornhill and Palmer 2000). There are five distinct categories of rapists: disadvantaged two likely evolutionary hypotheses for why men men who resort to rape, specialized rapists who commit rape: rape as a specialized male adapta- are sexually aroused by violent or forceful sex, tion (Thornhill and Palmer 2000) and rape as a men who rape opportunistically, high-mating- by-product of other male adaptations (Symons effort men who exhibit psychopathic tendencies, 1979). The human rape-adaptation hypothesis and partner rapists motivated by actual or describes a specialized suspected risk of sperm competition (e.g., by in which the inclination to sexually aggress female sexual infidelity). against women evolved in male psychology but It is important to note that although female is only deployed in particular circumstances. For a choice may be thwarted by male sexual aggres- specialized rape psychology to have been sion, it is possible that women have evolved selected, the benefits to ancestral men must have mechanisms that motivate them to prefer sexually outweighed the associated costs (e.g., although aggressive men. Because men who use sexually ancestral men may face a physically aggressive coercive behavior may be more reproductively husband or partner after committing rape against a successful over human evolutionary history, woman, they may nevertheless have increased women may desire that trait in their own male their reproductive success by copulating with an offspring. For example, one study found that sex- additional woman; McKibbin et al. 2008). In sum, ually coercive men have consensual sex at an rape may have been ancestrally adaptive when earlier age and have more consensual sex partners males were able to circumvent female choice than do noncoercive men (Koss and Dinero 1988). and increase their mating opportunities. This is not to argue that women generally prefer In contrast, the by-product hypothesis of rape men who rape. In fact, women may also have (Symons 1979) suggests that rape was not evolved psychological mechanisms to defend selected for but is a by-product of other male against rape. For instance, Buss (2006) suggests evolved psychological mechanisms. In other that women’s aversion to and intense fear of rape words, there is no male evolved psychological may have been selected because sexual aggres- mechanism specialized to motivate rape because sion by men has been a recurrent adaptation such a mechanism would not have produced net women have faced over evolutionary history. Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women 7

Rape Outside of the Context of Intimate Specialized rapists may have an evolved psychol- Relationships ogy or arousal pattern in which they experience more rapid during rape. Thornhill and Rapist Types Palmer (2000) suggest that a more rapid arousal First, regarding McKibbin et al. (2008)’s hypoth- and ejaculation pattern during rape may have been esized rapist types, the fact that disadvantaged successful, compared to men who did not exhibit men sometimes resort to rape aligns with the that pattern, because the rapist may avoid retalia- description of the mate deprivation hypothesis. tion and other possible costs of detection. Addi- This type of rapist includes men who lack or tionally, specialized rapists may have evolved have limited sexual opportunities or cannot access psychological adaptations which assess vulnera- consenting women (Lalumière et al. 1996; bility of victims, preference for fertile women, and Thornhill and Palmer 2000). Disadvantaged men high quantity ejaculates. who rape depend on a context-sensitive motiva- tion for rape, engaging in sexual aggression when Assessment of Vulnerability of Victims deprived of mates by normal means. For example, Women who are targets of sexual aggression or men in lower socioeconomic status brackets com- rape may be chosen by men because of a psycho- mit a disproportionate number of (Thornhill logical mechanism that motivate assessments of and Thornhill 1983). In this context, men who the associated risks and benefits of sexual coer- lack the resources to secure mates may resort to cion (e.g., “specialized” rapists; Thornhill and sexual aggression to achieve mating opportuni- Palmer 2000). For example, during warfare, a ties. Thornhill and Palmer (2000) suggest that an woman might not have protection from kin or a evolved psychology may motivate instances of long-term partner, and a prospective rapist might rape when men lack resources and/or sexual recognize this and target that woman. In this con- access to mates. text, the rape as adaptation hypothesis suggests Second, opportunistic rapists are men who may that men have evolved a vulnerability-detection initially engage consensually with sexually recep- mechanism specifically designed to assess poten- tive women but resort to sexual aggression when tial rape victims (Thornhill and Palmer 2000). the woman changes her mind or if the possibility However, evidence suggesting that men have an of retaliation for rape is low (McKibbin et al. evolved psychology that functions specifically to 2008). Opportunistic rapists may be especially evaluate a woman’s vulnerability to rape is insuf- inclined to rape when the victim is vulnerable ficient. In line with the by-product hypothesis of (e.g., during warfare). However, there is little rape, it is possible that men evaluate potential rape evidence that supports the opportunistic rapist victims according to an evolved cost-benefit eval- profile directly. uation mechanism that is not specific to rape Third, high-mating-effort rapists are hypothe- (Thornhill and Palmer 2000). In sum, neither the sized to be sexually experienced rapists who are rape-as-adaptation nor rape-as-byproduct hypoth- aggressive, dominant, have high self-esteem, and esis is uniquely supported by the evidence that psychopathic traits (McKibbin et al. 2008). women experience sexual aggression or rape in Unlike disadvantaged men who rape, high- contexts in which they are more vulnerable. mating-effort rapists do not have difficulty accessing consenting women. Specifically, psy- Ejaculate Quality in Rape chopathic men use high-mating-effort strategies Thornhill and Palmer (2000) suggest that there to gain sexual access without much investment, may be an increase in quality of rape ejaculates only resorting to sexual aggression when their compared to ejaculates produced during consen- other tactics do not succeed. sual sex. Particularly, an adaptation in men to Lastly, McKibbin et al. (2008) discuss “spe- increase ejaculate quality during rape may be cialized” rapists who report in related to sperm competition. An evolved ability response to violent or aggressive sexual stimuli. to influence ejaculate quality in the context of rape 8 Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women may increase the likelihood of fertilization. If men partners in an effort to successfully compete with who rape are able to provide a higher quality a rival’s sperm. Partner-rape may be an anti- ejaculate to the victim, their ejaculate would be cuckoldry strategy used by men to decrease their better equipped to deal with the higher likelihood paternity uncertainty and risk of cuckoldry. In line of sperm competition. For example, given that with this hypothesis, women are especially at risk attractiveness and youthfulness in women are of rape by a partner who reports concern about the valuable to men, a highly desirable, young woman’s sexual fidelity during or immediately woman may already have a long-term partner following a break-up (Thornhill and Palmer whose sperm is already inside her. A rapist may 2000). In this context, faced with potential deser- increase their success in sperm competition by tion or abandonment to a rival, men may rape their introducing a higher quality ejaculate (e.g., more partner (or ex-partner) to achieve fertilization of a sperm) into the woman. woman who no longer grants them sexual access. Additionally, one study found that men mated to Age of the Woman women who have committed sexual infidelity or If rape is an adaptation that increased ancestral were suspected to have committed sexual infidel- male reproductive success, one might expect that ity were more likely to use a variety of sexually rapists would target fertile, reproductive-aged aggressive tactics, including physical force and women, as opposed to nonfertile women. Similar rape (Goetz and Shackelford 2006). Related to to men’s use of physical aggression against the possibility that a man might adjust his ejacu- women, men who rape primarily target young late in a rape context, partnered men also might women (Thornhill and Thornhill 1983). Fertility produce higher quality ejaculates when they rape peaks in the mid-20s and women who are raped their partner (compared to ejaculates produced are disproportionately in that youthful, reproduc- during consensual sex with their partner), in an tive age bracket (Thornhill and Palmer 2000). It is effort to address perceived greater risk of sperm possible that a victim-preference mechanism, competition. such as a desire to copulate with younger, more attractive women, may have increased the ances- tral reproductive benefits of rape. However, men’s Conclusion preference for reproductive-age women also aligns with the by-product hypothesis of Men use distinct methods of physical and sexual rape given that the preference for young, aggression for particular reproductive reasons. reproductive-age women is exemplified in both Men use physical aggression against women to men’s choice of consensual partners and rape address recurrent adaptive problems of female victims. In sum, the age of the woman is related sexual infidelity, paternity uncertainty, and exclu- to rape prevalence but does not address whether sive sexual access. Although selection may have rape is motivated by specialized adaptation or as a favored men’s use of physical aggression, female by-product of other evolved mechanisms. aggression may have been mostly unfavorable to women’s ancestral reproductive success. Addi- tionally, men use sexual aggression against Rape in the Context of Intimate women to gain sexual access to young, Relationships reproductive-age women, to circumvent invest- ment, and to avoid male–male competition. In Between 10% and 26% of married women report instances of partner-rape, men use sexual aggres- experiencing rape by their husbands (McKibbin sion to combat the risk of cuckoldry by engaging et al. 2008). According to some researchers in sperm competition. Women rarely use sexual (Goetz and Shackelford 2006; Thornhill and aggression against men. Because women are a Palmer 2000), partner rape may be motivated by valuable reproductive resource that invests sperm competition. In the context of suspected or heavily in offspring, women do not compete as actual sexual infidelity, men may rape their intensely for sexual access to men. We caution Contexts for Men’s Aggression Against Women 9 that although men’s aggression against women Cross, C. P., & Campbell, A. (2011). Womens aggression. may have been selected over evolutionary time, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16(5), 390–398. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York: this does not mean that this aggression is morally Aldine De Gruyter. good or defensible. It is not. Intimate partner Downey, G., Feldman, S., & Ayduk, O. (2000). Rejection violence, homicide, and rape are global problems sensitivity and male violence in romantic relationships. that affect women in devastating ways (e.g., Personal Relationships, 7(1), 45–61. Easteal, P. W. (1993). Homicide between adult sexual contracting sexually transmitted infections, phys- intimates: A research agenda. Australian and ical ailments, etc.). Some researchers suggest that New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 26(1), 3–18. further inquiry surrounding Goetz, A. T., & Shackelford, T. K. (2006). Sexual coercion and physical assault may assist in discovering and forced in-pair copulation in humans as sperm com- petition tactics in humans. Human Nature, solutions to combat it (Perilla et al. 2011). Addi- 17, 265–282. tionally, other researchers suggest that rape pre- Goetz, A. T., Shackelford, T. K., Romero, G. A., vention programs and policies must gauge Kaighobadi, F., & Miner, E. J. (2008). Punishment, proximate and ultimate causes of sexual coercion, proprietariness, and paternity: Men’s violence against women from an evolutionary perspective. Aggression as well as incorporate more comprehensive, and Violent Behavior, 13(6), 481–489. multilevel strategies that incorporate genetic, Knight, R., & Sims-Knight, J. (2011). Risk factors for social, and behavioral understanding (Knight sexual assault. In Violence against women and children and Sims-Knight 2011). (Vol. 1, pp. 125–150). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Koss, M. P., & Dinero, T. E. (1988). Predictors of sexual aggression among a national sample of male college Cross-References students. In R. A. Prentky & V. L. Quinsey (Eds.), Human sexual aggression: Current perspectives – ▶ (pp. 133 147). New York: New York Academy of Aggression for Sexual Access Sciences. ▶ Female Age as a Predictor of Men’s Aggression Lalumière, M. L., Chalmers, L. J., Quinsey, V. L., & ▶ Female Infidelity Seto, M. C. (1996). A test of the mate deprivation ▶ Homicide Adaptation Theory hypothesis of sexual coercion. Ethology and – ▶ Sociobiology, 17(5), 299 318. Paternity Uncertainty McKibbin, W. F., Shackelford, T. K., Goetz, A. T., & Starratt, V. G. (2008). Why do men rape? An evolu- tionary psychological perspective. Review of General References Psychology, 12,86–97. Perilla, J., Lippy, C., Rosales, A., & Serrata, J. (2011). Prevalence of domestic violence. In Violence against Blake, K. R., Bastian, B., & Denson, T. F. (2017). Height- women and children (Vol. 1, pp. 199–220). ened male aggression toward sexualized women fol- Washington, DC: American Psychological lowing romantic rejection: The mediating role of sex – Association. goal activation. Aggressive Behavior, 44(1), 40 49. Shackelford, T. K., Buss, D. M., & Peters, J. (2000). Wife https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21722. fl killing: Risk to women as a function of age. Violence Buss, D. M. (1989). Con ict between the sexes: Strategic and Victims, 15(3), 273–282. interference and the evocation of anger and upset. Shackelford, T. K., Goetz, A. T., Buss, D. M., Euler, H. A., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, – & Hoier, S. (2005). When we hurt the ones we love: 56(5), 735 747. Predicting violence against women from men’s mate Buss, D. M. (2000). The dangerous passion: Why jealousy retention. Personal Relationships, 12(4), 447–463. is as necessary as love and sex. New York: Free Press. Smuts, B. (1992). Male aggression against women. Human Buss, D. M. (2006). The murderer next door: Why the mind Nature, 3(1), 1–44. is designed to kill. New York: Penguin Books. Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of . Buss, D. M. (2014). . New York: New York: Oxford University Press. Taylor & Francis. Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. (2000). A natural history of Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Human aggres- rape: Biological bases of sexual coercion. Cambridge, sion in evolutionary psychological perspective. – MA: MIT. Clinical Psychology Review, 17(6), 605 619. Thornhill, R., & Thornhill, N. W. (1983). Human rape: An Buss, D. M., Larsen, R. J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, evolutionary analysis. Ethology and Sociobiology, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy evolution, phys- 4(3), 137–173. iology, and psychology. Psychological Science, 3(4), 251–255.