Sexual Selection

The Sexual and Social Intelligence Hypothesis notes that anatomical differences in female genitalia of Homo and Pan are obvious. Although these genetic en epigenetic features are striking, they are seldom subject of research in evolutionary biology, -as far as my knowledge stretches-. Contrary to research on differences in Homo and Pan male sexual organs. I have read publications on differences in penislenght, endurement of erection, having a penis bone or not, and the number of ejaculations in a given period. In line with Darwin’s theory the  focus lies on reproduction (probability) and not on sexual behaviour itself.

My approach to explain human evolution is an ethological one. I have focused on evolutionary changes in sexual behaviour. I studied the behavioral differences between having sex (great apes) and making love (humans). My supposition is the link between sexual anatomy and sexual behaviour.

Darwin’s axiom equates Sexual Selection as (=) the female choice. The question I asked myself is: ‘Do human females select their partners on sexual behaviour, because of the anatomy of their sex organs?’

And if so: ‘Which signs, criteria and behaviour are selected and HOW?’ It is on this point that Biosemiotic comes in.

Sexual Selection is sign science. It involves perception, meaning, choice and  behaviour. The Sexual and Social Intelligence Hypothesis is based on biosemiotic theory and sign science. I am tributary to many great biosemiotic scholars. My special gratitude goes out to Jesper Hoffmeyer. One of the founding fathers of the International Society for Biosemiotics.

As a publisher wrote me -rejecting my essay-: ‘Though Darwinian theory is presumed to be generally accepted after more than 150 years, your essay made us doubt, and your questions made us rethink the premises. We look forward to further argumentation.’