a bonobo humanity?

‘Rise above yourself and grasp the world’ Archimedes – attribution

Posts Tagged ‘sisterhood’

Always look on the bright side….

leave a comment »

Okay, trying to stay positive, or push myself into positive mode, what about female leadership on the world stage in these torrid times?

Here in Australia, we’ve had one Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, from 2010 to 2013. It seems, like many of these recent female leaders, she was on the conservative side, for a Labor PM. Most ‘notorious’ at the time was her opposition to same-sex marriage, a view she later changed – after her stint in office. The Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Act was finally passed in 2017, during Malcom Turnbull’s period as PM (Turnbull was more liberal than the Liberal party generally). It had been a long struggle beginning in 2004 when the Howard government passed an amendment to the Marriage Act (1961), explicitly excluding same sex unions from being recognised as marriages. I see it as a minor victory for the Bonobo Sisterhood, though I suspect that change will occur through a multiplicity of such minor victories.

Globally, currently we have Sanae Takaichi, PM of Japan, Giorgia Meloni, PM of Italy, Judith Suminwa, PM of the DRC, Mia Mottley, PM of Barbados, Mette Frederiksen, PM of Denmark, Evika Silina, PM of Latvia, Inga Ruginiene, PM of Lithuania,  Brigitte Haas, PM of Liechtenstein, Sara Zaafarani, PM of Tunisia, and that’s not a full list – for example Mexico’s current political leader is their President, Claudia Sheinbaum – they don’t have a parliamentary system. Many of these are ‘firsts’ in terms of female leadership in their countries. Never a female leader in the USA of course, and I wouldn’t hold my breath… Canada has had one PM, Kim Campbell, and she didn’t last six months. I think it’s gonna be a long long time… It will take many generations, not years, to recognise the full value of female leadership. And it will need to be collective, not just one female surrounded by pushy male ‘minions’. As I’ve written before, slowly slowly catchee monkey…. a very appropriate term for the bonobo sisterhood, and its brotherly friends.

The big worry at present is that the most powerful and dangerous countries – the USA, Russia and China in particular, seem to be the furthest from female leadership (ok, leaving aside the Middle East). This is hardly coincidental of course. If we can weather the storms created by these macho, bullish nations over the next century or so – a big ask, admittedly – we just might start inching towards a bonobo humanity….

References

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elected_or_appointed_female_heads_of_state_or_government

Written by stewart henderson

October 21, 2026 at 9:47 pm

back to my big issue: bonobos and us

leave a comment »

Time to focus on, and keep focussing on, how a mammal so close to us – no mammal closer, genetically – a highly social mammal like us, with a similar sexual dimorphism to us (though with humans, the individual variations in size and strength are ‘all over the shop’ to use a technical term), became female dominant in the 1.5 million to 2 million years since it became a species apart from its chimp neighbours.

So, first, are bonobos really a species apart? I’ve heard that bonobos and chimps have inter-bred successfully, as did Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis back in the day. A New Scientist article from 10 years ago reports:

The genetic evidence shows that a little less than 1 per cent of the chimpanzee genome came from bonobos, from one contact between 200,000 and 550,000 years ago and another, more recent one less than 200,000 years ago…. It’s not yet clear whether the two episodes of gene flow happened at low levels over a long time or in discrete pulses.

Clearly, then, being separate species isn’t always a barrier, but I suspect genetic disparity is. For example, can a human successfully breed with a chimp or a bonobo? I’m here to ask the tough questions. The answer, sadly, is no, but they’re free to have deeply loving relationships. Okay, humans have 23 chromosome pairs, chimps and bonobos have 24, end of story, at least until we can work out a way…

But getting back to the big issue, female dominance. An article published in Communications Biology in April 2025 has just the title for me: Drivers of female power in bonobos. In the abstract, the authors found… well, let me quote:

Here we test three main hypotheses explaining intersexual power relationships, namely the self-reinforcing effects of winning and losing conflicts, the strength of mate competition, and female coalition formation. We test these for bonobos (Pan paniscus), one of our closest living relatives, where females have high status relative to males despite male-biased size dimorphism. We compiled demographic and behavioural data of 30 years and 6 wild living communities. Our results only support predictions of the female coalition hypothesis (my emphasis).

So, this study makes clear that female coalitions are absolutely central to female dominance in bonobos. And would be absolutely central, IMHO, to female dominance in humans. A bonobo sisterhood indeed. And I should add that this study – a godsend to me – explores gender-based dominance in many mammalian species, with coalitions being generally key to female dominance where it exists.

This is so important. As I’ve written previously, I get push-back from women who say that this female Prime Minister X, or that female boss Y, or my horrible mother Z is somehow proof that women are, at the very least, no better than men, in terms of leadership. I try to suppress my annoyance at this totally irrelevant response. In an environment of male dominance, it’s not surprising that some women will behave ‘more manlier than men’, in order to gain prominence. Indeed, they may feel that they have no other choice. Again I’ll quote the simple remark made by the African-American novelist Toni Morrison: ‘the problem isn’t men, the problem is patriarchy’, to which I respond, ‘the solution isn’t women, it’s matriarchy. It’s sisterhood.’

So my new resolution, to focus more or less exclusively on this issue (a very tough one to keep to, I admit), has made me decide to reread Diane Rosenfeld’s book, referenced below. The book begins with the problem of male domestic violence in the USA. She’s a lawyer, and has dealt with many domestic violence and domestic abuse cases. So, interestingly, I looked up statistics on male domestic violence in the USA, and was shocked to find a listing of male victims of domestic violence in that country. I twice rephrased my enquiry, and both times it gave me the same men-as-victims results. Conspiracy theories anyone? I would generally not entertain such ideas, but in Frumpistan, tout est possible. When I keep trying, I find the statistics are all over the place, but of course women are more often the victims, especially of the more extreme forms of violence, including, unsurprisingly, murder. In February 2026, the FBI released a report on DV over a five-year period, 2020 to 2024:

Over the five-year period studied, the percentage of violent crimes within domestic relationships increased. Law enforcement reported more than 11,000 domestic violence murder victims and an additional 1.1 million victims of domestic violence. Nearly 75 percent of the victims were female.

Again, I would think it most reasonable to assume that if the violence was extreme, or ended in murder, the perpetrator would be male in far more than 75% of cases.

So this post is a statement of intent. To explore and encourage female coalitions – such as those I’ve read about between Palestinian and Israeli women. Women in difficult and male-dominated regions such as Iran, the Arabic world, China, Turkiye, Russia, and presumably many parts of Africa. I’m making guesses here, to some degree, and hopefully, in researching these countries further, I’ll find some silver linings. I don’t think I’ll be looking at the USA in the near future, at least until Frumpistan is no more.

References

Chimps and bonobos interbred and exchanged genes

https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-025-07900-8

Diane L Rosenfeld, The Bonobo Sisterhood: revolution through female alliance, 2022

Written by stewart henderson

October 1, 2026 at 12:17 pm

Are humans monogamous by nature? Will they always be?

leave a comment »

bonobo girls

I often forget the title of this blog, and what I’m supposed to be writing about, so multifarious is my genius (I contain multitudes mate), so let me return, hopefully not too briefly, to bonobos, behaviour, patriarchy, matriarchy, evolution and all that stuff.

In an earlier blog piece, some time ago, I reviewed an essay in a probably defunct journal called Evolutionary Psychology which tried to get stuck into a couple of feminists for promoting a bonobo-type lifestyle. What struck me most about this extremely irritating article was that it had virtually nothing to say about bonobos –  this in an Evolutionary Psychology journal! – and everything to say about the supposed absurdity of the feminist writers. Here’s a classic example:

It is egregiously naïve to conclude that, “bonobos reveal that an incredible range of sexual diversity is normal for animals like us” (p. 99, emphasis in original).

This is, of course, not at all naïve. There are no animals on the planet closer to humans than bonobos, so to describe them as ‘animals like us’, is completely accurate. Elsewhere in his essay, he criticises his targets for not ‘understanding human sex differences in sexual desire’. He doesn’t elaborate on these sex differences. This is because there’s no such thing, any more than there is in bonobos. Of course there are individual differences. Some humans, and no doubt some bonobos, tend to be more randy than others, for all sorts of reasons, to do with up-bringing, neural development, genetics, whatever. Gender does play a role, of course, more in some societies than others. Let’s not forget that the penalty for adultery in early Christian society was to be stoned to death – but only for females (males were barely penalised at all). I say females, not women, since females were more often than not sold into marriage on the payment of a dowry from the age of ten, or even younger. A bit of a dampener for a girl’s promiscuous impulses, I’d say.

It’s my view that monogamy is more a cultural institution than a natural given for humans, and I would cite our closest relatives, chimps and bonobos, both non-monogamous, as evidence. Some six to eight million years separate us from those relatives, and there isn’t much evidence about the sex lives of neanderthals, australopithecines or other hominins – and not much chance that we’ll ever find out about their sexual proclivities. It’s been argued that Australopithecus afarensis at least was a sexually dimorphic species, but there’s a question about the extent of evidence. In any case, though sexual dimorphism might have equated with dominance a million years ago, it’s hardly much of a factor for modern humans. From hunter-gatherers to post-industrial society, physical size has mattered less and less – power has been measured differently. We have evidence, presented by eminent researchers such as Joseph Henrich, that the ruling classes of not so long ago, evolutionarily speaking, tended to monopolise the field, with polygynous systems that left the lower classes bereft of partners. I’m talking male dominance here, of course, something like that of gorillas, with financial and military heft replacing that of physicality. Those upper class polygynous societies were essentially about female enslavement, though there would certainly be nuances – hierarchies among the women, benefits to the more intellectually endowed, even the occasional female ruler. But mostly it would be male dominance, which, in the more ‘intellectual’ cultures, such as those of Athens, Rome, Alexandria and later Baghdad, led to the dogma of ‘feeble-minded women’ (and if you don’t sufficiently recognise your inferiority you might suffer the fate of Hypatia), which has taken centuries to quash, and which in some regions, such as parts of the USA, is still with us.

Modern science has taught us that there is no evidentiary basis for male dominance. It certainly can’t be based on intelligence. Decades ago a young female friend expressed a belief to me that males were on average smarter than females. I was too stunned to respond. Did she think that male dogs and cats were generally smarter than their female counterparts? Her view was a relic of millennia of patriarchy. And recently I read something priceless, a comment on a youtube video presented by an anti-feminist young woman, bizarrely enough. The comments, less surprisingly, were all from approving males. This bloke’s simple remark was ‘They need to realise that power comes with responsibility’. I switched off pretty quickly, but this odd and ridiculous remark kept striking me with its arrogant ignorance, so here’s my response:

Responsibility is indeed important, like the responsibility for nurturing an embryo, then a foetus, then a child, as it grows inside a womb, and for suckling and feeding that child after his birth, guiding his first steps and teaching him his first words. Think of the billions of human infants who’ve been nursed and cared for in this way, just in the last few decades. And then think of our marital system – how many infants, born outside of that system, have been raised by men, rather than women? And within the system, how many women have left the marriage, and its children, compared to men? How many men have been the victims of domestic violence, compared to women? How is it that men sexually abuse or rape women, and this never happens to men, except sometimes at the hands of other men? So, yes, responsibility… there’s nothing more important.

Bonobos make good mothers, helped by other adults, and siblings, male and female. They engage in plenty of rough and tumble stuff, and they can get violent, usually when males get too uppity. A defensive violence, a sisterhood, because it’s a physical environment, much more so than our own, and the males are a wee bit bigger. It would be hard to translate their non-monogamous world into our own, which has become only slightly less monogamous over the last couple of centuries, but their example is, to me, an inspiring one, so vive les bonobos, let’s always manage to keep them in their wild state, so they can keep us thinking of different ways to be, collectively.

References

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo

https://prezi.com/wuvsj2ah8gbf/women-in-palestine-during-the-time-of-jesus/

Written by stewart henderson

September 12, 2026 at 8:55 pm

The Bonobo Sisterhood – some comments

leave a comment »

Chrystul Kizer self-portrait

Recently I finally acquired a copy of The Bonobo Sisterhood, by Diane Rosenfeld, which, for obvious reasons, I’ve been keen to read. However, having read two thirds of the book, I must say that I find it something of a let-down. Firstly, it’s very US-based, which sorely tests my anti-US bias, shameful though that is. Second, it concentrates almost solely on individual male sexual violence – certainly an important topic, but not so much a part of my own focus, which is political, economic, legal and military power, among other things. It’s also somewhat aggressively black-and-white, often giving the impression that most if not all males are potential violators and/or sexual predators, which, when I think of my own social circle, strikes me as absurd. A great deal of the writing focuses on women’s self-defence, which, again, I’ve never given much thought to. None of the women in my admittedly narrow circle go in for self-defence training, though most have been into physical fitness, yoga, pilates and the like. They clearly don’t feel the need for it, which might suggest that this is more of a US problem. Then again, my little microcosm may be atypical.

To be fair, The Australian Bureau of Statistics does make for grim reading on male violence,

In the most recent incident of physical assault by a male (September 2023):

For women

  • 87% knew the perpetrator
  • 70% experienced the incident in a residential location
  • 63% experienced anxiety or fear

For men

  • 42% knew the perpetrator
  • 74% experienced the incident in a non-residential location
So, yes, self-defence training might be a useful option (do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself), as might ‘girl gangs’ or safety in numbers. And Australia’s figures, I’d reckon, are much the same as those of any other WEIRD country.
Another focus of the book is policing, and legal treatment of women who have been abused and fought back. Rosenfeld reveals, unsurprisingly, a bias in these arenas with respect to both gender and ethnicity. That’s to say, African-American women seem to be given a particularly raw deal. She goes into detail about one case, that of Chrystul Kizer, a 17-year-old accused of shooting Randall Volar, a sex trafficker who had been abusing her over an extensive period. Both Chrystul and her mother had been abused by other men, and Volar’s history of abuse, relating to many women, was extensive, but the authorities had been slow to act against him, to put it mildly. Chrystul’s case became something of a cause célèbre for the MeToo movement, and her fate was undecided at the time of The Bonobo Sisterhood’s publication. She has since been sentenced to 11 years’ prison. Hopefully, this isn’t the end of the matter, and I have to say, a great deal of what I read of the US justice system, especially as it pertains to the disadvantaged, makes me white with rage.
So, as I continue to read The Bonobo Sisterhood, I have moments of overwhelming emotion which make it hard to continue. For example the story of low-caste girls being sold into sexual slavery in Mumbai, the stories of Dr Denis Mukwege and ‘Mama C’, Christine Schuler Deschryver, founders of Panzi Hospital, and V, aka Eve Ensler, co-founder of City of Joy, all in the DRC, where bonobos abide and where female victims of warfare, terror and horrific abuse are being protected and rehabilitated, as far as is possible.
We have to continue the push, for female political, legal and financial dominance, which will not lead to any utopia, for utopias are simply fictions, but will definitely lead to something better than we have now. I’ll no doubt have more to say once I’m finished this book.
Reference
Diane L Rosenfeld, The Bonobo Sisterhood: revolution through female alliance, 2022

Written by stewart henderson

October 5, 2024 at 12:16 pm