Comments on: Crazy Anthropologist Links Food, Sex

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:08:42 +0000

Agnostic: You have not read the story carefully. This is not about a French anthropologist. Just a crazy one. You need to visit the original piece.

By: agnostic

agnostic — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:57:44 +0000

The title says “crazy anthropologist,” while the article says “French anthropologist,” implying that “French” = “crazy.” That’s racist.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:19:44 +0000

RyanG: As usual, the situation is complex . Chimpanzee sexual dimorphism is definitely not minimal. Sexual dimorphism in the Australopith species for which there are plenty of sample, barring any revision in taxonomy, have higher sexual dimorphism than chimps. Modern humans have relatively low sexual diomrophism, less than either the australopiths or chimps. Putting Dmanisi aside (that site is not sorted out) it looks like Homo erectus has relatively low sexual dimorphism.Some populations of archaic H. sapiens (like Neanderthals) may have relatively high sexual dimorphism.

By: RyanG

RyanG — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:32:52 +0000

I was under the impression that sexual dimorphism in chimpanzees and bonobos is minimal – less than in early or modern humans. Has google lead me astray?

By: laurisa

laurisa — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:05:52 +0000

haven’t I read this before somewhere??? I didn’t realize it was “alternative.” happy birthday to the mz.