More than just a pretty face: The overlooked contributions of women in evolutionary psychology textbooks.

Abstract

A great deal of evolutionary psychology (EP) texts and research emphasize the attractiveness of women over other skills or qualities. I would argue that given the parameters of the evolutionary landscape, the skills and strategies women used after mating and birth (particularly because it is widely argued that almost all women have an opportunity to mate) would be more important to their evolutionary success. To only focus on youth and beauty omits major portions of the human life span and human behavior and ignores the definition of fitness: the number of offspring who survive to reproduce. To this end, I examined introductory EP textbooks for the following content: if physical attractiveness was listed as a factor in female evolutionary success, if intelligence/resourcefulness or other traits were listed as factors, if skills and strategies women use after mating and birth were discussed, and if the role of older women was mentioned. The majority of EP texts discuss female attractiveness in detail, omit female intelligence and resourcefulness, overemphasize the role of men in feeding families, and neglect older women. Overall, this gives an incomplete and biased view of the human species. I then explore what female skills and strategies would play a large role in the survival of the species and should be discussed in introductory textbooks. Public Significance StatementEvolutionary psychology textbooks are the doorway to the discipline. How they depict humanity sets the framework for both future research and public perception. An examination of several textbooks shows that the majority discuss female attractiveness in detail, omit female intelligence and resourcefulness, diminish the role of women in provisioning and neglect older women. Overall, this gives an incomplete and/or biased view of the human species.

Gendered conflict in the human family

“…Decades later, we are still addressing these same issues, and evolutionary studies of sex and gender remain steeped in controversy (Ah-King, 2022;Cooke, 2022;Sani, 2017). Burch (2020), for example, concludes that evolutionary psychology textbooks routinely discuss the dynamics of female physical attractiveness, while saying little about women's intelligence and resourcefulness, and overemphasizing the role of men in provisioning their families. On this same theme, Sear (2021) tackles a widespread myth that a male breadwinner-female homemaker nuclear family is the 'traditional' family structure, arguing that cross-cultural and historical observation reveals remarkable flexibility in childcare responsibilities and the division of labour (see also Bliege Bird & Codding, 2015;Starkweather et al, 2020).…”