4 ms·
>“It turned out all that stuff was mostly wrong,” Mech said. In 2022, his publisher agreed to stop printing the book. Yet, although field biologists no longer u
by 462436347 4y ago
>“It turned out all that stuff was mostly wrong,” Mech said. In 2022, his publisher agreed to stop printing the book. Yet, although field biologists no longer use the terms “alpha” and “beta,” they have proved too useful for humans to drop—now we use them in relation to our own groupings and conflicts.
Ok, forget about wolves. What about non-human great apes, like chimpanzees or mountain gorillas, much closer to us genetically than canids? Are their societies not hierarchical, polygynous, and alpha-led?
- PKop 4y ago[flagged]
- jccalhoun 4y agoI'd love to read your sources for this information if you would like to share them.
- LBJsPNS 4y agocrickets
- amanaplanacanal 4y agoI suspect that this was all driven by the invention of agriculture. Since in the last 100 years we are starting to move away from being a mostly agricultural society, I’m guessing those relationships will change. Only time will tell.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- greazy 4y agoOur two closest relatives are the chimpanzee and Bonobo. The Bonobo is far more interesting. They have a dynamic society, where sometimes it's matriarchal or more balanced. The wiki article is a fascinating read: > Although a male bonobo is dominant to a female in a dyadic interaction,[46] depending on the community, socially-bonded females may be co-dominant with males[47] or dominant over them, even to the extent that females can coerce reluctant males into mating with them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo Personally I think humans are far closer to Bonobos than chimps in our societal structure. We should allow more dynamic structures to arise, and have more sex along the way.
- nickpeterson 4y agoFinally a political platform with some legs.
- jrootabega 4y agoSounds like a couple Heinlein settings.