Accordingly, arguments presenting human patriarchy as a primate legacy appear misguided, and gender relations should be considered in relation to their social and ecological contexts.
David Graeber from beyond the grave: I fuckin told yall
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
69 points (100.0% liked)
science
20074 readers
339 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well, yeah...
Silverbacks used to be the go-to primate "alpha" example, but we know that "the tribe" isn't controlled by the Silverback, and it's not the biggest or most aggressive that "leads".
The females select more for compassion than anything. And the only real point of the Silverback in the tribe is to scare off rogue males.
Fights rarely happen, there just has to be a silverback already with the group to stop the rogues from hassling the group.
Even if a rogue male started a fight, and beat the group's silverback, there's still like 20 other gorillas, it's not like they only have conflict in 1v1 fights. They don't "win" leadership thru fighting.
The tribe just picks their own Silverback as designated chest thumper to avoid conflict.
Wasn't this shit not true from the get-go? not even to the wolves the whole idea came from?
In the original studies they threw a bunch of adult wolves from different packs into a small enclosure. Then reported the fight for dominance as if it was how they normally act in nature. Most packs in nature are just a mom and a dad with kids from the last 2-3 years, who usually leave on their own.