A DARWINIAN INTERPRETATION OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN MALE PROPENSITY FOR SEXUAL AGGRESSION Martin L. Lalumiére ‘Vernon L. Quinsey" ABSTRACT: This article reviews studies of individual diferences in male propensity for sexual aggression, examines the implications of the findings forthe formulation of| Darwinian theories of sexual aggression, and discusses implications for law and policy ‘A Darwinian view of sexual aggression is likly to have practical implications through better understanding of is etiology. CITATION: Martin L. Latumire and Vernon L. Quinsey, A Darwinian Interpretation of Individual Differences in Male Propensity for Sexual Aggression, 39 Jurimetris J. 201-216 (1999), 1 INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Any theory aimed at explaining male sexual aggression must incorporate what is known about individual differences in male propensity for sexually aggressive behavior. These individual differences can be grouped, forthe most par, according to three majr factors: deviant sexual preferences, mating effort, and antisociality. In this article we define these terms, review the empirical * Martin L.Lalumiére, PAD. C.Psych, is Assistant Profesor of Psychiatry and Criminology, University of Toronto, and Research Psychologist, Forensic Division, Center for Addition and Mental Health. Veron L. Quinsey, PhD, C.Psych, is Profesor of Psychology and Psychisiry, ‘Queen's University atKingston De Michal Seo provided ver useful suggestions onan easier draft ofthis article WINTER 1999 201Lalumiére and Quinsey evidence, and offer Darwinian interpretations. We then discuss implications for law and public policy. We focus on men who are sexually aggressive against ‘women, butalso occasionally refer to men who sexually offend against children. ‘We discuss both acquaintance and stranger rape, but due to space limitation we will not discuss marital rape or rape that occurs inthe context of war and social upheaval.) A. Deviant Sexual Preferences Sexual preferences are usually considered deviant when they are both (1) statistically unusual and (2) likely to inflict unwanted harm on self or others if acted upon, The deviant sexual preferencesmost often studied include pedophilia (@ preference for prepubescent males or females) and preferential rape (a preference for violent, nonconsenting sexual activities with postpubescent individuals, most often females). Child molesters and rapists are the most commonly studied groups of sex offenders. From a Darwinian perspective, anomalous sexual preferences are those that lower one’s inclusive fitness in most circumstances (especially in the environ- ‘ment in which our species evolved). Anomalous preferences encompass most, if notall, sexual deviancies, most major paraphilias as usualy defined in psychiatry or sexology, and other sexual preferences, such as homosexuality, that are not usually considered deviant or paraphilic. Anomalous sexual preferences aremuch ‘more common in men than in women, They have rarely been documented in nonhuman species, and, because they reduce rather than enhance reproductive success, they are relatively rare ‘Male sexual preferences can be measured ina number of ways.*Phallometry, the measurement of penile erection during the presentation of sexual stimuli in the laboratory, offers the most objective measure, even when men are motivated to conceal their true preferences.’ The phallometric study of male sexual aggressors has produced very consistent findings. Men apprehended for rape, defined here as a sexual assault against a postpubescent female, show greater relative penile arousal to audiotaped stories depicting nonconsenting, coercive sex than men who have never been apprehended for a sexual offense.’ One study |. See generally MaRTINDALY & MARGo WILSON, HOMICIDE (1988); RICHARD WRANGHAM. ‘& DALE Perenson, Dinonic MALES (1996) (offering a Darwinian view on these topics) 2. See Vernon L. Quin el, The Piplogsnetc and Ontagenstic Development of Sexual Age Preferences in Males: Conceptual and MeararemntIesuet, sn Ti JUVENILE SEX OFFENDER 13-63 (Howard E Baratee et al eds, 1993) 3. See generally VERNON L. QUINSCY & MARTIN L. LALUMAERE, ASSESSMENT OF SEXUAL ‘Orresbens AGAINST CHILDREN (1996), 4. SeeMartnL, Lalumiére & Vernon. Quinsey, The Discriminability ofp rom NonSex (Offenders Using Phllometrc Measures: A Meta-analysis, 21 CRIM. WSt-& BEHAV. 150 (1994), ‘Martin L. Lalumiér & Veron L. Quinsy, The Sent of Phallomeric Measures with Rapist, 6 ANNALS SEX Rs. 123 (1993) (providing quantitative reviews) 202 39 JURIMETRICSA Darwinian Interpretation of Individual Differences on self-reported sexual aggression (mostly acquaintance rape) among young rales recruited from the community produced similar results. Larger differences between phallometric measurements of rapists andl other men are found when the audio stimuli include very graphic and brutal descriptions of rape scenarios.° Child molesters" phallometically measured sexual preferences differ from those of other men (in thiscase, they exhibit preference for children over adults)” Phallometrically measured sexual preferences have higher discriminant validity than any other method when the appropriate procedures are used." Phallometric ‘measures are also good predictors of sexual recidivism among both rapists and child molesters? Causes of Individual Differences in Sexual Preferences “The male sexual preference system appears to direct men’s sexval behaviors, toward fertile women, Judgments of physical and sexual attractiveness, covertly ‘measured viewing time, and phallometry indicate that most men, regardless of their own age, prefer healthy, average weight, young adult females with specific waist-to-hip ratios as sexual partners.” There is striking agreement across cultures on the sexual attractiveness of individual women." Male sexual preference for characteristics associated with female reproductive success ‘appears to be an adaptation. Most men's sexual preferences are, similar to other Ee 5. See Nel M. Malamuth, Predictors of Naturalistic Sexual Aggression, 0 J. PERSONALETY| ‘& Soe. PSvcit 953 (1986). Bu sve Marin L. Lalumidre & Vernon L, Quinsy, Sexual Device, “jntsciaiy, Mating Efort ane the Use of Sexually Coercive Behaviors, 21 PERSONALITY & {NorvrDUaL DIFFERENCES 33 (1996) (ailing to replicate fining). 16 See Marnie E. Rice ea, Empathy for the Vien and Sexual Aseult Among Rapits and Nonapiats, 9 INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE 435 (1994), "7 QUINSEY & LALUMIERE, supra note 3. 4 See Marin L- Lalumiere & Grant T. Haris, Common Questions Regarding the Use of Phollomerie Testing with Sexual Offenders, 10 SEXUAL ABUSE: J RES. & TREATMENT 227 (1998). 1S” Sce_ generally VeRxON L, QUINSEY ET AL, VIOLENT OFFENDERS: APPRAISING AND Mawaoino Ris (1998), Follow-up studies indict tha eild molesters are more specialized their ‘rening than rapists inthe sense that they are moe likely to commit anew sexual offense and less, Iiketyto comma subsequent nonsexual offense than rapists. Specialization ina paticaar type of fens, however, can be used indifferent senses. Rapsts, with the exception of those who have Already commited numberof rape, are unspeiaized in the sense that Tei ext eime is more Tikely tobe nonsexuel than sexual However, rapist are specialized inte sense that hey are more {iklyto commit a new sex offense than offenders who have never commited one 10, See generally Vernon L Quinsey ea, Vieworg Time asa Measure of Ses Interest, 17 ErnoLogy & Sociosio.ocy 34 (1996); Dougis T Kearik & Richard. Keefe, Age Preferences tn dMater Reflect Sex Differences Human Reproductive Srategies, 15 BEHAV. & BRAINS. 75 (4992), 11. See generally Michael R. Cuningham eta, Their Ideas of Beauty Are. onthe Whole. the “Same as Ours: Consstoney and Variability in Cross Cultural Perception of Female Atracivenes, 666) PERSONALITY & SOC. PSYCHOL. 261 (1995) WINTER 1999 203