Celebrating the natural.

An Evolutionary Theory Celebration of Male Sexual Arousal by Females: The Foundations of Male Heterosexuality. By Marvin Siegelman, Ph.D. New York: iUniverse, Inc., 2006, 139 pages. Paper, $14.95.

Although relatively brief (115 pages without references), Dr. Siegelman's book on evolutionary theory and male heterosexuality is exhaustively referenced and explicated. In the author's view, evolution (or "Mother Nature" as he often puts it) has equipped males with the innate capacity to become sexually aroused by live, nude, attractive females. (His thesaurus received quite a workout: the objects of arousal are referred to as "exciting females," "enchanting nude female[s]," "gorgeous females," "beautiful females," "young, health, fertile females," and "alluring females," and that is just on page 78!)

Siegelman's book really has two purposes. First, it is an explication of the major tenets of evolutionary theory as it relates to male sexual arousal. Second, Siegelman does what most evolutionary psychologists are a bit hesitant to do: he endorses this arousal as not only natural, but desirable and life fulfilling. He states:

   This psychological mechanism, male sexual arousal by
   females, that appears to be the most important and only
   mechanism devoted exclusively to facilitating reproductive
   success, and thus the primary and essential
   determinant of our existence on this planet, must be
   intrinsically good, valuable, necessary and high in moral
   value (p. 109).

Most of the major theorists and research studies from evolutionary psychology that explain or describe male sexual arousal to females are included here. The first two-thirds of the book provide an exhaustive review of evolutionary theory and how it predicts both male sexual arousal and male sexual desire for "live, nude females." Both Thorndike's Law of Effect and evolutionary theory are used to explain male sexual arousal to attractive nude females. However, combining hedonism and evolutionary theory is sometimes a tricky proposition.

While many of the activities or things that make us feel good are also "good for us" (i.e., they increase the chances of survival), there are activities or things that may feel good but are also "bad for us" (i.e., they decrease the chances of survival). For example, a taste for fatty foods, the "rush" of dangerous, risky behaviors, and even the (sometimes) pleasing effects of alcohol can all be very "unhealthy" behaviors--they would decrease the chances of survival and passing on our genes.

The author purports to say that male sexual arousal for attractive nude females begins around puberty and becomes an important part of male experience. In fact, according to the Siegelman, it really becomes the most important part of the male experience. He states, "I find it unthinkable that anyone could question the value of partaking in what has to be for most, if not all, males, the quintessential physical delight. For me, the sense of exhilaration, ecstasy, self-actualization, well-being, and rapture of being alive is epitomized by my orgasmic enchantment" (p. 76).

One difficulty with this thinking is that it frankly is not really supported by research. In Buss et al.'s (1989) widely cited cross cultural study of 37 cultures, physical attractiveness was ranked by males, on average, third on a list of desirable characteristics of a potential female mate. Certainly some men are highly motivated by sexual pursuits; many are not. Significantly, for males (and females, for that matter) both kindness and intelligence ranked ahead of physical attractiveness on the list of desirable characteristics for a potential mate. I think purely sexual hedonism in all males is not quite as widespread as Dr. Siegelman believes.

As stated above, the early part of the book presents a thorough review of evolutionary psychology and how sexual arousal for females would help males to procreate. There was nothing particularly new or noteworthy about the material that is presented and the argument that is explicated. It is well known that male heterosexuals do find physically attractive females sexually arousing. Is this arousal a learned response, or built-in to our male ancestors to help insure the continuation of the species? The author suggests the latter, and builds a strong case for an automatic "push" for males to sexually desire and become sexually aroused by attractive females. Although Siegelman is quick to point out that this sexual desire and sexual response is completely natural and important for passing on genes, the story is a bit more complicated.

The topic of individual differences is obviously of interest to many in psychology, not least of which are evolutionary psychologists. Because the field of evolutionary psychology is relatively young, it has had some difficulty explaining individual differences. For example, although heterosexual sexual activity (sexual intercourse specifically) is necessary for species survival, it is not necessary for individual survival. Therefore, somebody, somewhere better have heterosexual sexual intercourse for continuation of the species, but individuals need not engage in heterosexual sexual intercourse to prosper and live long lives. Although it is uncommon, some women and men have lived long, healthy lives without ever engaging in sexual relations. In fact, one could make the argument that eating a delicious sandwich when hungry is more basic to survival and more deeply enjoyable in a primal level than any sexual experience could ever be.

There is only a very brief (half of one page) mention of male homosexuals in the book. Although the title of the book includes the subheading "The Foundations of Male Heterosexuality," there is no explanation why this sexual arousal process which is apparently so very strong in every male is absent in other males. Specifically, as I read the text I frequently wondered about not only male homosexuals, but also monogamous males (one sexual partner in their lifetimes), celibate males, and males who consciously choose not to have children. Granted, these groups are not huge in number, but taken together, they are a substantial quantity of males who pose difficulty for Siegelman's theory. Although the evolutionary framework provides a parsimonious and intriguing explanation for a majority of male sexual behavior, it by no means explains all male sexual behavior. That is simply a limitation of the theory; however, this text does not help widen the scope of the evolutionary explanation.

The last part of the book is more subjective, and frankly, more interesting. Although nominally related to evolutionary theory, the author advocates a less inhibited expression of male sexuality in society while likewise urging sexologists to study "normal" sexual behavior (rather than sexual pathology) more frequently. Siegelman provides some provocative speculations. For example, he argues that it is likely that males who are especially mesmerized by viewing gorgeous nude female bodies may also be the males most likely to enjoy other aesthetic pleasures such as sunsets or musical performances (an empirical question, to be sure). A bit further on he suggests that males who enjoy nude females do so indiscriminately. "All lovely females," he writes, "irrespective of race, skin color, nationality, religion and all other identifying characteristics, are perceived by males as exciting and desirable" (p. 109). He suggests that if society would allow males more freedom to do just that, prejudice and discrimination in this country would likely be reduced.

Who would benefit from reading this book? To be fair, I have always been sympathetic to evolutionary psychology. Although there are human behaviors that are not easily explained by the theory, I find it to be an appealing and provocative theory of human behavior. Siegelman's book makes a compelling argument for evolution being involved in sexual arousal and desire, but not quite fresh or original enough to recommend the book for those interested in evolutionary psychology.

Last, Siegelman's call for sexology to focus more on the positive aspects of sexual experience is a good call. Just as Positive Psychology (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) has pushed for the scientific study of the positive aspects of normal human functioning and a de-emphasis on pathology, Siegelman's call for a focus on the positive, normative parts of human sexuality are most welcome.

References

Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses testing in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.

Seligman, M. E. P. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5-14.

Reviewed by Mark G. Hartlaub, Texas A & M University-Corpus Christi, Department of Psychology, 6300 Ocean Drive, Corpus Christi, TX 78412. E-mail: Mark. [e-mail].