GENE Richard Dawkins OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

220 召ル / / ogra カん、ア 87. ZAHAVI, A. Personal commumcation, quoted by perrmssron. Perrins). MacmiIIan, London. tion of altruism. ln 00 ん行 4 0 ん (ed. B. Stonehouse and C. M. 86. ZAHAVI, A. ()n press). Reliability in communication systems and the evolu— 召 /. 53 , 205-14. 85. ZAHAVI, A. ( 1975 ). Mate selection—a selection for a handicap. ユ印尾た Oxford. 84. YOUNG, J. Z. ( 1975 ). 7 ・ ' / ツ、〃 za 川川 4 ム . 2nd edition. CIarendon press, 厖んれツ 0 . OIiver and Boyd, Edinburgh. 83. WYNNE-EDWARDS, V. C. ( 1962 ). , 4 襯 4 / 市び朝 0 〃尾 / 4 行朝 4 / press. 82. WILSON, E. O. ( 1975 ). So 0 ん 0 ん . ・ど nem リ厩んな . Harvard University 81. Ⅵ朝い ON , E. 0. ( 1971 ). 7 ' んどど行い . Harvard University press. Jersey. 80. WILLIAMS, G. C. ( 1975 ). S ど工 4 〃ノれ , 0 ん行 0 〃 . Princeton University press, New University Press, New Jersey. 79. WILLIAMS, G. C. ( 1966 ). , イノ行聞ノ natural / な行 . Princeton 78. WICKLER, W. ( 1968 ). / Ⅷをア . World University Library, London. 77. TURNBULL, C. ( 1972 ). The 川 0 Ⅷ知卯ん . Jonathan Cape, London. SOCial insects. S ( 、〃 ( で 191, 249 ー 63. 76. TRIVERS, R. L. and HARE, H. ( 1976 ). Haplodiploidy and the evolution of the 75. TRIVERS, R. L. ( 1974 ). Parent—offspring conflict. , イ川び . / /. 14, 249 ー 64. / れ石 4 〃ノ励ど“ど厩研襯〃〃 (ed. B. Campbell). Aldine, Chicago. 74. TRIVERS, R. L. ( 1972 ). parental investment and sexual selection. ln sexual 46 , 35-57. 73. TRIVERS, R. L. ( 1971 ). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. 犬ど亡召あ /. any? ユ印た召 /. 72. TREISMAN, 、生 and DAWKINS, R. ()n press). The cost Of meiosis—is there 71. TINBERGEN, N. ( 1953 ). S 仇 / んれ肝 4 〃 4 ム . Methuen, London. mals. , 4 川び . A ' . 104 , 491 ー 94 ・ 70. SMYTHE, N. ( 1970 ). ()n the existence Of pursuit invitauon signals in ト

おル〃 ogra カ 46. MCFARLAND, D. J. ( 1971). お“渤 4 川“ん〃川 5 川 4 ″ 4 / み訪れ . Academic Press, London. 47. MARLER p. R. ( 1959 ). Developments in the study 0f animal communication. ln Darmin's ん 0 / og な 4 / mo (ed. P. R. Bell). Cambridge University Press. PP. 15J206. 48. MAYNARD SMITH, J. い 972 ). Game theory and the evolution 0f fighting. ln J. Maynard Smith 0 〃れⅥん〃 . Edinburgh UniversitY Press. 49. MAYNARD SMITH, J. ( 1974 ). The theory 0f games and the evolution 0f animal conflict. 1 T ん印たお /. 47 , 209 ー 21. 50. MAYNARD SMITH, J. い 975 ). The ッ、れ , 0 ん行 . Penguin, London. 51. MAYNARD SMITH, J. ( 1976 ). Sexual selection and the handicap principle. ユ 印なた召 /. 57 , 239 ー 42 ・ 52. MAYNARD SMITH, J. ( 1976 ). Evolution and the theory 0f games. 月襯び . Sci. 64 , 41 ー 5 ・ 53. MAYNARD SMITH, J. and PARKER, G. A. ( 1976 ). The logic 0f asymmetric contests. 月〃洫 . お勗 4 て ,. 24 , 159 ー 75 ・ 54. MAYNARD SMITH, J. and PRICE, G. R. ( 1973 ). The logic of animal conflicts. A な 246 , 15 ー 18. 55. MEAD, M. ( 1950 ). 4 / ど聞ノ大川なん . Gollancz, London. 56. MEDAWAR, P. B. ( 1957 ). T んどⅧ〃どツツん市朝ノⅧ /. Methuen, London. 57. MONOD, J. L. ( 1974 ). On the molecular theory of evolution. ln 0 みな川 s ツ、 “厩 c 00 ん行 (ed. R. Harré). Clarendon Press, Oxford. PP. ロー 24 ・ 58. MONTAGU, A. ( 1976 ). 第んど加 tu な研ん〃川 4 〃 agg な . Oxford University Press, New York. 59. MORRIS, DESMOND ( 1957 ). 、 Typical lntensity' and its relation t0 the problem Of ritualization. B どん 4 てツ 0 ″ I I, 1—21. 60. 、 4 どな・ 0 / 00 , れ“んパ G れ / い 966 ). Longmans, London. P. 96. 61. ORGEL, L. E. ( 1973 ). The 催 / k 5 研 / . Chapman and Hall' London. 62. PARKER, G. A. , BAKER, R. R. , and SMITH' v. G. F. ( 1972 ). The origin and evolution 0f gametic dimorphism and the male¯female phenomenon. ユ 7 、ん印なた召 /. 36 , 52g53 ・ 63. PAYNE, R. S. and MCVAY, S. い 971 ). Songs of humpback whales. & 元〃 173 , 583 ーっ 7. 64. POPPER, K. ( 1974 ). The rationality of scientific revolutions. ln P みた襯研 “ c なん行 (ed. R. Harré). Clarendon Press' Oxford. PP. 72 ー 101. 65. ROTHENBUHLER, W. C. ( 1964 ). Behavior genetics 0f nest cleaning in honey bees. I V. Responses of and backcross generations t0 d isease-killed brood , 4 川び . ん砿 4 , 1 1 1 ー 23 ・ 66. RYDER, R. ( 1975 ). 怖 5 研“〃“ . Davis—Poynter, London. 67. SAGAN, L. ( 1967 ). On the origin of mitosing cells. ユ T ん印なたお /. , 225 ー 74 ・ 68. SHEPPARD, p. M. ( 1958 ). Natural / “行 4 な市 . Hutchinson' Lon don. 69. SIMPSON, G. G. ( 1966 ). The biological nature 0f man. S 巧 2 , 472 ー 78. 219

Bibliography Not all the works listed here are mentioned by name in the b00k, but all of them are referred tO by number in the index. 22. ELTON, C. S. ( 1942 ). 新 , Ⅷ 4 〃ノ / ど川 g 立 Oxford UniversitY Press. 21. EIBL-EIBLESFELDT, I. い 971 ). ん 0 4 ″ノん 4 に Methuen, London. Freeman, San FranCISC0. 20. EHRLICH, P. R. , EHRLICH, A. H. , and HOLDREN, J. P. い 973 ). 〃″な 0 ん g ) ′・ ven. . DOBZHANSKY, T. ( 1962 ). 盟 4 最川ノれ , 0 ん g. Yale University Press, New tion and a fallacy. Nature 262 , 131 ー 2. 18. DAWKINS, R. and CARLISLE, T. R. ( 1976 ). Parentalinvestment, mate deser- 17. DARWIN, C. R. ( 1859 ). 7 ・加〃研れ元 & John Murray, London. 16. CULLEN, J. M. Unpublished study on theory 0f non-genetic evolution. IOI ー 22. て :er ん / 印〃ⅧⅧな 4 行 (ed. R. A. Hinde). Cambridge UniversitY Press. pp. 15. CULLEN, J. M. ( 1972 ). Some principles 0f animal communication. ln Non- 14. CLOAK, F. T. Jr. い 975 ). ls a cultural ethology possible? 〃″川 . 0 /. 3 , 161— altruism or manipulation? 月川どた朝た一 09 , 107 ーー 2. 13. CHARNOV, E. L. and KREBS, J. R. ( 1975 ). The evolution 0f alarm calls: 4 / 立元肌寳 (eds. F. R. H0dson et 4 /. ). University Press, Edinburgh. tural and biological evolution. ln は 1 んど川 4 行ど 4 なん 4 印 / og な 4 / 4 〃ノん← ロ . CAVALL ト SFORZA, L. L. い 971). Similarities and dissimilanties of sociocul- 11. CAIRNS-SMITH, A. G. い 971 ). 7 加〃な第″ん . Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh. 10. BURGESS, J. W. い 976 ). Social spiders. & ツ - , イ川び . 234 , ( 3 ) , 101 ー 6. 9. BROADBENT, D. E. い 961 ). お勗れ . Eyre and Spottiswoode, London. prokaryotes. ) ′〃ゆ . Soc. General 盟川ん 0 /. 20 , 279 ー -94 ・ 8. BODMER, W. F. ( 1970 ). The evolutionary significance 0f recombination in bridge University Press. pp. 281 ー 301 G 川物な 0 ん g ァ (eds. P. P. G. Bateson & R. A. Hinde). Cam- 7. BERTRAM, B. C. R. ( 1976 ). Kin selection in lions and in evolution. ln 6. BASTOCK, M. ( 1967 ). Co なんゆ . ・ 4 応側ん翩 / 立〃れ . Heinemann, London. 5. ARDREY, R. い 970 ). 7 ・加 ( 、 / 印厩 ra け . Collins, London. parasitism 0f the magpie ( 門翩が c の . 月襯 . 召勗れ ,. 4. ALVAREZ, F. , DE REYNA, A. , and SEGURA, H. ()n press). Experimental brood- 3. ALLEE, W. C. (undated). 7 ・加 5 / life 研 4 〃ルⅧな . Heinemann, London. ) ・ 5 , 325 ー 83 ・ 2. ALEXANDER, R. D. ( 1974 ). The evolution of social behavior. 月 . 犬れ ,. 0 /. in field crickets. お訪れ肝 , 130 ー 223 ・ I. ALEXANDER, R. D. い 961 ). Aggressiveness, territoriality, and sexual behavior

218 召ル〃 ograp owitz). BlaisdeII, New York. pp. 38877. 〃印尾記 4 〃ノ川んど肌 4 行翩 / 房 0 ん (eds. T. H. Waterman and H. J. Mor- 45. MACARTHUR, R. H. ( 1965 ). Ecological consequences of natural selection. ln Lon don. 44. LURIA, S. E. ( 1973 ). ん - ーど哩〃パみ記どた Souvenir Press, London. 43. LORENZ, K. Z. ( 1966 ). て , 0 ん行ノ川 0 イ ca 〃研厖んれツ . Methuen, 42. LORENZ, K. Z. ( 1966 ). 0 〃 agg 〃 . Methuen, London. “ 0 / og ア 7 , ( 27 ) , 57 ー 72. confined populations of four species of rodents. 犬ぉなん 0 〃 2 〃 / 4 行 0 〃 41. LIDICKER, W. Z. Jr. い 965 ). Comparative study of density regulation in 40. LEWIN, B. ( 1974 ) G どど工カ尾ルー 2. Wiley, London. elephant seals. , 4 川び . / 側 /. 14 , 163 ー 76. 39. LE BOEUF, B. J. ( 1974 ). Male male competition and reproductive success in 38. LACK, D. ( 1966 ). P ″な行立″市研み耘ム . Clarendon Press, Oxford. Oxford. 37. LACK, D. ( 1954 ). 7 ' んどれ襯〃 ra / な g ″ / れツ、 4 襯記Ⅷ川 Clarendon Press, Chicago University Press. 36. KRUUK, H. ( 1972 ). T んど 0 ″どノわ′ど na. ・ 4 ″研 2 尾行側 4 れノ行記み勗 4 ⅳ催 . hypothesis. , 4 ″ . お勗 4 て :. 35. KREBS, J. R. ()n press). The significance of song repertoires—the Beau Geste guage. , イ〃 . 勗 ,. 17, 607 ー 17. 34. KALMUS, H. ( 1969 ). Animal behaviour and theories of games and of lan- development in a free-living bird population. , イ〃 . 召 4 て ,. 33. JENKINS, P. F. ()n press). CuItural transnusslon of song patterns and dialect London. 32. HOYLE, F. and ELLIOT, J. ( 1962 ). 月ノ月〃ノ ro 襯ど . Souvenir Press, Hill, New York. 31. HINDE, R. A. ( 1974 ). みん g / 翩 / んツ、ん″川 4 〃砌 4 / み勗 . McGraw- elms. . 犬れ ,. お /. 50 , 175 ー 80. 30. HAMILTON, W. D. ( 1975 ). GambIers since life began: barnacles, aphids, insects. 月〃劜犬れ ,. 印 /. ) . 3 , 193 ー 232 ・ 29. HAMILTON, W. D. ( 1972 ). Altruism and related phenomena, mainly in social 31, 295 ー 311 ・ 28. HAMILTON, W. D. ( 1971). Geometry for the selfish herd. 1 7 加お /. 27. HAMILTON, W. D. ( 1967 ). Extraordinary sex ratios. & 〃“ 156 , 477 ー 88. (I). ユたお /. 7 , 1—16; 17 ー 32. 26. HAMILTON, W. D. ( 1964 ). The geneticaltheory of social behaviour (I and 25. HALDANE, J. B. S. ( 1955 ). PopuIation genetics. 、どル召んん 18, 34 ー 51 ・ Schrier and F. St011nitz). Academic Press, New York and London. an infant chimpanzee. ln お訪れツ催研加〃 - ん〃川 4 〃川 (eds. A. M. 24. ・ GARDNER, B. T. and GARDNER, R. A. ( 1971 ). Two-way communication with Press, Oxford. 23. FISHER, R. A. い 930 ). 7 、んど g ど雇行翩 / 励印研 na / / な行 . Clarendon

Four thousand million years ago molecules with the power [ ( ) make COpies Of themselves first appeared ⅲ the sea. What was the fate Of these ancient replicators ヨ They did not die 0 : they are masters Of the survival arts. But dO not look for them floating loose ⅲ the sea ; they gave up that cavalier freedom long 0. Now they swarm in huge colonies, safe inside gigantic lumbering robots, manipulating the outside world by re- mote control. They are ⅲ all of us ; they created us, bOdy and mind ; and their preservation is the SOle reason fO 「 our existence. have COme 2 long way, those replicators. Now they go by the name Of genes, and we are their machines. Thus Richard Dawkins intrOduces us t0 our- selves as we really are—throwaway survival— machines for Our immortal genes. N1an iS a gene machine : a 田 bo [ vehicle, blindly programmed tO preserve lts selfish genes. The world of the gene machine is one 矼 savage competltlOn, ruthless exploitation, and deceit. ・ rhiS iS seen not only in aggression between rivals, bLlt alSO in the more subtle battles between the generations and be い the sexes. But what 矼 the familiar examples 矼 apparent altruism found throughout nature, from mothers WhO WOrk themselves almost [ 0 death for their children, tO small birds who risk their li 、 'es warning their f10Ck of 田 1 ap- proaching hawk ~ Richard Dawkins shows how they all result from the selfishness of genes, exploding the cosy view held 応「 so long, and popularized by Konrad Lorenz and Robert Ardrey, that animals behave 、応 r the good of the species'. Far from dry academic exet•cise, the b00k grips like thriller, and is ali 、 'e with fascinating stories : ab ( 川 [ fish Wh0 queue up t() have theil ・ teeth cleaned—and then refrain from swallowing the tiny dentist ; about ants who take slaves and tend fungus gardens ; about the kamikaze bees WhO commit certain suicide 、、 hen they sting robbers 矼 the communal honey. But the most unexpected sting in this unexpected book is the one ⅲ the tail—the last chapter, WhiCh gi 、 tlS new, even startling, way of lOOking at ourselves, and Our unique culture. we are the only animals capable of seeing through the designs of the se fish genes, and of rebelling against them. E3 ・ 50 net Ⅲ U K c 齏 Davvkims D 目月寘 S )IS TH E SELFISH GENE Richard Dawkins was born in 1941 and edu- cated at Oundle Sch001 and Balli01 C011ege, Oxford. After graduation he worked for his doctorate under Professor NikO Tinbergen and subsequently spent tWO years as an AsSiStant Professor Of Z0010gy 社 the University 矼 Cali- fornia Berkeley. Since 1970 he has been University Lecturer ⅲ Animal Behaviour at the University Of Oxford and a Fellow 0f New C011ege Dr. research interests centre On theoretical models ⅲ ethologv (the study Of animal behaviour) and experimental teStS Of them, especially models 0f decision-making. ( ) 「 hiS ctlrrent projects involves the com— ptlter simulation Of cricket SO.ng tO determme the basis ( ) 「 female attraction. HiS Wife N'1arian is also an ethologist at ()xford and they have published several joint research papers ・ ・工 d 巴 60 ← 0Lld PueMUa)l を 2 を一工Åq qd 巴 60 ← oqd ミミ、 2 ゝ ~ に山 8 トを三 1u2 辷 OL'N を 0ES20 Åq 6u!it-J!ed 2 u10 に S! uo に e と s コ = こ 2 02 一 aq ト Robert L. Trivers, who contributed the FO 代 - word, is Associate professor of Bi010gy 虹 the Museum ( ) 「 Comparative Zoology, Harvard University. U*•iord OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 旧 B N 0 1 9 85751 9 X

Four thousand million years ago molecules with the power [ ( ) make COpies Of themselves first appeared ⅲ the sea. What was the fate Of these ancient replicators ヨ They did not die 0 : they are masters Of the survival arts. But dO not look for them floating loose ⅲ the sea ; they gave up that cavalier freedom long 0. Now they swarm in huge colonies, safe inside gigantic lumbering robots, manipulating the outside world by re- mote control. They are ⅲ all of us ; they created us, bOdy and mind ; and their preservation is the SOle reason fO 「 our existence. have COme 2 long way, those replicators. Now they go by the name Of genes, and we are their machines. Thus Richard Dawkins intrOduces us t0 our- selves as we really are—throwaway survival— machines for Our immortal genes. N1an iS a gene machine : a 田 bo [ vehicle, blindly programmed tO preserve lts selfish genes. The world of the gene machine is one 矼 savage competltlOn, ruthless exploitation, and deceit. ・ rhiS iS seen not only in aggression between rivals, bLlt alSO in the more subtle battles between the generations and be い the sexes. But what 矼 the familiar examples 矼 apparent altruism found throughout nature, from mothers WhO WOrk themselves almost [ 0 death for their children, tO small birds who risk their li 、 'es warning their f10Ck of 田 1 ap- proaching hawk ~ Richard Dawkins shows how they all result from the selfishness of genes, exploding the cosy view held 応「 so long, and popularized by Konrad Lorenz and Robert Ardrey, that animals behave 、応 r the good of the species'. Far from dry academic exet•cise, the b00k grips like thriller, and is ali 、 'e with fascinating stories : ab ( 川 [ fish Wh0 queue up t() have theil ・ teeth cleaned—and then refrain from swallowing the tiny dentist ; about ants who take slaves and tend fungus gardens ; about the kamikaze bees WhO commit certain suicide 、、 hen they sting robbers 矼 the communal honey. But the most unexpected sting in this unexpected book is the one ⅲ the tail—the last chapter, WhiCh gi 、 tlS new, even startling, way of lOOking at ourselves, and Our unique culture. we are the only animals capable of seeing through the designs of the se fish genes, and of rebelling against them. E3 ・ 50 net Ⅲ U K c 齏 Davvkims D 目月寘 S )IS TH E SELFISH GENE Richard Dawkins was born in 1941 and edu- cated at Oundle Sch001 and Balli01 C011ege, Oxford. After graduation he worked for his doctorate under Professor NikO Tinbergen and subsequently spent tWO years as an AsSiStant Professor Of Z0010gy 社 the University 矼 Cali- fornia Berkeley. Since 1970 he has been University Lecturer ⅲ Animal Behaviour at the University Of Oxford and a Fellow 0f New C011ege Dr. research interests centre On theoretical models ⅲ ethologv (the study Of animal behaviour) and experimental teStS Of them, especially models 0f decision-making. ( ) 「 hiS ctlrrent projects involves the com— ptlter simulation Of cricket SO.ng tO determme the basis ( ) 「 female attraction. HiS Wife N'1arian is also an ethologist at ()xford and they have published several joint research papers ・ ・工 d 巴 60 ← 0Lld PueMUa)l を 2 を一工Åq qd 巴 60 ← oqd ミミ、 2 ゝ ~ に山 8 トを三 1u2 辷 OL'N を 0ES20 Åq 6u!it-J!ed 2 u10 に S! uo に e と s コ = こ 2 02 一 aq ト Robert L. Trivers, who contributed the FO 代 - word, is Associate professor of Bi010gy 虹 the Museum ( ) 「 Comparative Zoology, Harvard University. U*•iord OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 旧 B N 0 1 9 85751 9 X

OxJ み ( , ツんび朝り′ P 尾新確 ' 4 ″ S など既 0. ノ 0X2 6DP OXFORD LO 、一 X ) 、 GLASGOW 、 EW YORK TORO 、 TO 、 IELBOURNE WELLINGTO 、 CAPE TOWN IBADA 、、 A ー RO 田 DAR ES SALAAM KUALA LUMPUR SINGAPORE JAKARTA HO 、 G KO 、 6 TOKYO DELHI BOMBAY CALCUTI ・ A MADRAS KARACHI ( 0 ) OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS ー 976 月″ g んなびノ . No 灯研ア″翩行襯厖′ゆ川面“ノ , ど / れ・作 0 〃れ・ , 川れツ 4 〃 4 / , 2 ん仇・ 02 ) ″〃 4 , れ・ 0 ′市〃 g 0 んど rw パど , m 〃ん似″ ど r 2 ど′川〃ツ・ 0 ツらし〃れ :er 朝り乃・ど British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Dawkins, Richard The selfish gene. ISBN 0 ー・ 19 ー 857519 ー X 1. Title 59L5 L7 AnimaIs, Habits and behaviour of Animals ー Genetics FIRST PUBLISHED 1976 REPRINTED (WITH CORRECTIONS) 76 , 1977 , 1978 FILMSET IN ' MO 、 OP 日 0T0 ' EHRHARDT ーー 0 、一 2 PT BY R ー CHARD CLAY (THE CHAUCER PRFSS), LTD. , BUNGAY , SUFF()LK AND PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY FLETCHER & SON LTD. , NORWICH

CIutton-Brock and Jean Dawkins, independently with apologies to Stephen P0tter. lmaginary readers may serve as targets for pious hopes and aspirations, but they are Of less practical use than real readers and critics. I am addicted tO revismg, and Marian Dawkins has been subjected t0 countless drafts and redrafts 0f every page. Her con- siderable knowledge of the biological literature and her under- standing Of theoretical issues, together with her ceaseless encour— agement and moral support, have been essential tO me. JOhn Krebs too read the whole book in draft. He knows more about the sub)ect than I d0, and he has been generous and unstinting with his advice and suggestions. GIenys Thomson and WaIter Bodmer criticized my handling of genetic topics kindly but firmly. I fear that my revislon may still not fully satisfy them, but I hope they will find it somewhat improved. I am most grateful for their time and patience. J()hn (_)awkins exercised an unerring eye for misleading phraseology, and made excellent constructive suggestions for re-wording. I could not have wished for a more suitable 'intelligent layman' than MaxweII Stamp. His perceptive spotting 0f an important general flaw in the style of the first draft did much for the fin versron. Others who constructively criticized particular chapters, or otherwise gave expert advice, were John Maynard Smith, Desmond Morris, Tom MaschIer, Nick BIurton Jones, Sarah KettIeweII, Nick Humphrey, Tim CIutton-Brock, Louise Johnson, Christopher Graham, Geoff Parker, and Robert Trivers. Pat SearIe and Stephanie Verhoeven not only typed with skill, but encouraged me by seeming to do so with enjoyment. Finally, I wish to thank MichaeI Rodgers of Oxford University Press who, in addition to helpfully criticizing the manuscript, worked far beyond the call of duty in attending to all aspects of the production of this book. RICHARD DAWKINS XI

think about evolutionary arguments such as those in this chapter, we cannot help reflecting about our own species and our own experience. Notions Of females withholding copulation until a male shows some evidence Of long-term fidelity may strike a familiar chord. This might suggest that human females play the domestic-bliss rather than the he-man strategy. 、 lost human SOC1et1es are indeed monogamous. ln our own SOC1ety, parental lnvestment by bOth parents is large and not obviously unbalanced. Mothers certainly d0 more direct work for children than fathers dO, but fathers Often work hard in a more indirect sense tO provide the material resources that are poured intO the children. On the Other hand, some human societles are promi— scuous, and some are harem-based. What this astonishing variety suggests is that man s way 0f life is largely determined bY culture rather than by genes. However, it is still possible that human males in general have a tendency towards promscuity, and females a tendency towards monogamy, as we would predict on evolutionary grounds. Which Of these tWO tendencies ln particular socleties depends on details Of cultural circumstance, just as in different animal species it depends on ecological details. One feature of our own society which seems decidedly anomalous iS the matter Of sexual advertisement. AS we have seen, lt IS strongly tO be expected on evolutionary grounds that' where the sexes differ, it should be the males who advertise and the females who are drab. M0dern western man is undoubtedly exceptional in this respect. lt is Of course true that some men dress flamboyantly and some women dress drably but, on aver- age, there can be no doubt that in our society the equivalent Of the peacock's tail is exhibited by the femal% not bY the male• women paint their faces and glue on false eyelashes. Apart from actors and homosexuals, men dO not. Women seem tO be inter¯ ested in their own personal appearance and they are encouraged in thiS by their magazmes and journals. magazines are less preoccupied with male sexual attractiveness, and a man WhO is unusually interested in his own dress and appearance IS apt tO arouse susp1C10n, bOth among men and among women. When a woman is described in conversatlon, it IS quite likely that her sexual attractiveness, or lack Of it, will be prominently mentioned. ThiS iS true, whether the speaker iS a man or a woman. When a 177