6 ms·

There was a study that showed that cuckoldry was pretty rare, the rate was around 1-2%[0]: "Reading the internet, or even perusing the scientific literature, y

There was a study that showed that cuckoldry was pretty rare, the rate was around 1-2%[0]: "Reading the internet, or even perusing the scientific literature, you'd get the idea that people are constantly cheating on their spouses. Indeed, scientists have estimated that anywhere from 10-30 percent of men are unknowingly raising children who are not their own. This situation is referred to as cuckoldry, or scientifically as "extra-pair paternity." Now, however, it appears that our estimates of cuckoldry rates were way off. A new survey published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution sums up a number of recent studies that show the actual rate of cuckolds in the general population, based on genetic testing and ancestor research, is 1-2 percent. This challenges evolutionary psychologists who have suggested that human women "routinely ‘shop around’ for good genes by engaging in extra-pair copulation to obtain genetic benefits." This idea came in part from studying socially monogamous songbirds, which mate for life but have roughly 1 in 10 babies as a result of "extra pair" matings." [0]: https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/04/cuckoldry-is-incredibly-rare-among-humans https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/04/cuckoldry-is-incredi...

gowld 5y ago
It could be that modern birth control has reduced the rate of extra-pair paternity, as sexual impulses have (partially) decoupled from procreation.
- anonporridge 5y ago
  From the above article... > Scientists were so unwilling to believe that human women were different from songbirds that some suggested the discrepancy between expected and actual rates of cuckoldry was a recent development caused by birth control. It would be quite interesting to do a study on modern social groups where birth control isn't yet ubiquitous. It could be fairly easy to do this kind of study covertly and anonymize the source so as to not risk throwing it into disarray if the results come back with high rates of cuckoldery.
  - JadeNB 5y ago
    > It could be fairly easy to do this kind of study covertly and anonymize the source so as to not risk throwing it into disarray if the results come back with high rates of cuckoldery. Are you sure? A covert study seems likely unethical, and attempts at anonymization tend to show it's much harder than people think.
anonporridge 5y ago
I'd love for this to be true, but it does conflict with various state policy decisions on the matter that seem to indicate at least a belief in the opposite. France's policy is particularly striking, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_paternity_testing#France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_paternity_testing#France It is possible that state institutions make these policies based exactly on my assumption above, which seems like it could be incorrect. Or perhaps even 1-2% is still enough to cause significant social cost if easily exposed.
- quirkot 5y ago
  In France, when you get married or have a kid you get a family book and it is the official record of your family. If you don't put a kid in, they don't have the same rights and vice versa. Really leans into the "family is a social construct" angle
- nicolas_t 5y ago
  France is incredibly regressive and conservative when it comes to anything related to genetics. For example, for people doing IVF, it's not allowed to test the embryos for viability. The argument is that such testing is too close to eugenics, so instead women doing IVF cannot get any guarantees that the embryos are viable and it makes the procedure harder. Doing a DNA test for yourself is also illegal... Surrogacy is also not legal in France because “Any agreement, even if it does not provide for remuneration, whereby a woman agrees to conceive, bear and give birth to a child and then renounce it, is contrary to public order, the inviolability of the human body and the personal status of a natural person.” So I wouldn't put much stoke into the policies of France on this matter
  - elzbardico 5y ago
    Maybe they are not incredibly regressive and conservative. Maybe they are different. You may not agree with their position but it is very imperialistic to suppose that any custom or law which is not exactly as it is in America must be considered backwards.
    - 5y ago
drewcoo 5y ago
Considering nobody ever considers it, 1-2% is huge! 1 in every 50-100 families. How many people from different families do you know? Even if your family isn't one of affected, I'd bet you know several people from affected families.
- anonporridge 5y ago
  There are about 120 million households in the US. Lets assume that approximately 100 million are parental households with children (either still dependents or grown and independent). We're talking at least 1-2 million families that could be affected by paternity fraud in the US alone. That has the potential to be massively disruptive if exposed to these 1-2 million families.
- brimble 5y ago
  Further, if those rates are similar across time and roughly evenly distributed among populations, it means that carefully-researched family tree your aunt (or whoever) has spent so much time working on gets unreliable (as far as biological parentage) fast, the more generations you go back. "Look, I'm distantly related to [famous person]!" Well... maybe.
  - barry-cotter 5y ago
    > Further, if those rates are similar across time and roughly evenly distributed among populations They’re not. Rates of extra paternity events vary a lot by social class[1]. I'd be shocked if that wasn’t true for different ethnic groups. [1] A Historical-Genetic Reconstruction of Human Extra-Pair Paternity Highlights • Combining genetic and genealogical data illuminates our ancestors’ sexual behavior • Gene-genealogy mismatches imply extra-pair paternity (EPP) • Historical EPP rates were low overall (∼1%) but varied depending on social context • EPP rates were highest (∼6%) among urban families with low socioeconomic status https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982219313053 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096098221...
- akavi 5y ago
  I would strongly expect it to be clustered in specific populations. I'd be very surprised if the rate among HN readers was equal to the rate among the general population.
CPLX 5y ago
That's a massive number. It means that basically every time you go out to dinner you're in the room with someone who doesn't know that their father isn't their father.
langsoul-com 5y ago
Even so, 1-2% of 1 billion people is 10 million people...

gowld 5y ago

It could be that modern birth control has reduced the rate of extra-pair paternity, as sexual impulses have (partially) decoupled from procreation.

anonporridge 5y ago
From the above article... > Scientists were so unwilling to believe that human women were different from songbirds that some suggested the discrepancy between expected and actual rates of cuckoldry was a recent development caused by birth control. It would be quite interesting to do a study on modern social groups where birth control isn't yet ubiquitous. It could be fairly easy to do this kind of study covertly and anonymize the source so as to not risk throwing it into disarray if the results come back with high rates of cuckoldery.
- JadeNB 5y ago
  > It could be fairly easy to do this kind of study covertly and anonymize the source so as to not risk throwing it into disarray if the results come back with high rates of cuckoldery. Are you sure? A covert study seems likely unethical, and attempts at anonymization tend to show it's much harder than people think.

anonporridge 5y ago

I'd love for this to be true, but it does conflict with various state policy decisions on the matter that seem to indicate at least a belief in the opposite. France's policy is particularly striking, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_paternity_testing#France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_paternity_testing#France It is possible that state institutions make these policies based exactly on my assumption above, which seems like it could be incorrect. Or perhaps even 1-2% is still enough to cause significant social cost if easily exposed.

quirkot 5y ago
In France, when you get married or have a kid you get a family book and it is the official record of your family. If you don't put a kid in, they don't have the same rights and vice versa. Really leans into the "family is a social construct" angle
nicolas_t 5y ago
France is incredibly regressive and conservative when it comes to anything related to genetics. For example, for people doing IVF, it's not allowed to test the embryos for viability. The argument is that such testing is too close to eugenics, so instead women doing IVF cannot get any guarantees that the embryos are viable and it makes the procedure harder. Doing a DNA test for yourself is also illegal... Surrogacy is also not legal in France because “Any agreement, even if it does not provide for remuneration, whereby a woman agrees to conceive, bear and give birth to a child and then renounce it, is contrary to public order, the inviolability of the human body and the personal status of a natural person.” So I wouldn't put much stoke into the policies of France on this matter
- elzbardico 5y ago
  Maybe they are not incredibly regressive and conservative. Maybe they are different. You may not agree with their position but it is very imperialistic to suppose that any custom or law which is not exactly as it is in America must be considered backwards.
  - 5y ago

drewcoo 5y ago

Considering nobody ever considers it, 1-2% is huge! 1 in every 50-100 families. How many people from different families do you know? Even if your family isn't one of affected, I'd bet you know several people from affected families.

anonporridge 5y ago
There are about 120 million households in the US. Lets assume that approximately 100 million are parental households with children (either still dependents or grown and independent). We're talking at least 1-2 million families that could be affected by paternity fraud in the US alone. That has the potential to be massively disruptive if exposed to these 1-2 million families.
brimble 5y ago
Further, if those rates are similar across time and roughly evenly distributed among populations, it means that carefully-researched family tree your aunt (or whoever) has spent so much time working on gets unreliable (as far as biological parentage) fast, the more generations you go back. "Look, I'm distantly related to [famous person]!" Well... maybe.
- barry-cotter 5y ago
  > Further, if those rates are similar across time and roughly evenly distributed among populations They’re not. Rates of extra paternity events vary a lot by social class[1]. I'd be shocked if that wasn’t true for different ethnic groups. [1] A Historical-Genetic Reconstruction of Human Extra-Pair Paternity Highlights • Combining genetic and genealogical data illuminates our ancestors’ sexual behavior • Gene-genealogy mismatches imply extra-pair paternity (EPP) • Historical EPP rates were low overall (∼1%) but varied depending on social context • EPP rates were highest (∼6%) among urban families with low socioeconomic status https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982219313053 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096098221...
akavi 5y ago
I would strongly expect it to be clustered in specific populations. I'd be very surprised if the rate among HN readers was equal to the rate among the general population.

CPLX 5y ago

That's a massive number. It means that basically every time you go out to dinner you're in the room with someone who doesn't know that their father isn't their father.

langsoul-com 5y ago

Even so, 1-2% of 1 billion people is 10 million people...