This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
The Kramer (2008) and Whiting et al. (2009) data and interpretations suggest that early birthing (i.e., just under age 14) would not have been selected against, despite its slight average suboptimality (as suggested in Kramer’s sample), owing to its benefits for some individuals in high-constraint environments.
For example, consider three prototypical females: A (age 14, high reproductive value), B (age 24, peak fertility), and C (age 34, low reproductive value). A preference for A over C clearly implies a greater probability of reproductive success (i.e., lifetime fertility).
The most recent nonclinical evidence appeared in Rind and Welter’s (2016) analysis of the Kinsey male “homosexual sample” (i.e., extensive postpubertal homosexual experience, but quite varied in sexual orientation). In response to their first postpubertal homosexual experience, most pubescent boys (≤ 14) with men enjoyed it “much,” the top scale value on this measure (76 %), few had emotionally negative reactions (e.g., fear, disgust) (19 %), and their reactions to these hebephilic sexual relations were not inferior to men’s reactions to sex with other men (i.e., androphilic relations: enjoyed much = 68 %; emotionally negative = 16 %).
References
Clancy, K. (2012, January 18). Interrogating claims about natural sexual behavior: More on deep thinking hebephile. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/context-and-variation/interrogating-claims-about-natural-sexual-behavior-more-on-deep-thinking-hebephile/. Accessed 17 July 2012.
Crapo, R. H. (1995). Factors in the cross-cultural patterning of male homosexuality: A reappraisal of the literature. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 178–202.
Dixson, A. F. (2010). Homosexual behavior in primates. In A. Polani (Ed.), Animal homosexuality: A biosocial perspective (pp. 381–400). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dixson, A. F. (2012). Primate sexuality: Comparative studies of the prosimians, monkeys, apes, and humans (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Ford, C., & Beach, F. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
Gould, S. J., & Vrba, E. S. (1982). Exaptation—A missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology, 8, 4–15.
Hames, R., & Blanchard, R. (2012). Anthropological data regarding the adaptiveness of hebephilia [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 745–747.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.
Irons, W. (1998). Adaptively relevant environments versus the environment of evolutionary adaptiveness. Evolutionary Anthropology, 6, 194–204.
Jones, D., Brace, C. L., Jankowiak, W., Laland, K. N., Musselman, L. E., Langlois, J. H., … Symons, D. (1995). Sexual selection, physical attractiveness, and facial neoteny: Cross-cultural evidence and implications. Current Anthropology, 36, 723–748.
Kramer, K. L. (2008). Early sexual maturity among Pumé foragers of Venezuela: Fitness implications of teen motherhood. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 136, 338–350.
Lautmann, R. (1994). Die Lust am Kind [Attraction to children]. Hamburg: Ingrid Klein Pubs. Inc.
Leca, J. B., Gunst, N., & Vasey, P. L. (2014). Male homosexual behavior in a free-ranging all-male group of Japanese macaques at Minoo, Japan. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 853–861.
Muller, M. N., Thompson, M. E., & Wrangham, R. W. (2006). Male chimpanzees prefer mating with old females. Current Biology, 16, 2234–2238.
Rind, B. (2013). Critique of Hames and Blanchard (2012), Clancy (2012), and Ryniker (2012) on hebephilia, anthropological data, and maladaptiveness [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 685–691.
Rind, B., & Welter, M. (2016). Reactions to first postpubertal male same-sex sexual experience in the Kinsey sample: A comparison of minors with peers, minors with adults, and adults with adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 1771–1786.
Rind, B., & Yuill, R. (2012). Hebephilia as mental disorder? A historical, cross-cultural, sociological, cross-species, non-clinical empirical, and evolutionary review. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 797–829.
Seto, M. C. (2016). The puzzle of male chronophilias. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0799-y.
Shostak, M. (1983). Nisa, the life and words of a !Kung woman. New York: Random House.
Sugiyama, L. S. (2016). Physical attractiveness: An adaptationist perspective. In D. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (2nd ed., pp. 317–384). New York: Wiley.
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
VanderLaan, D. P., Ren, Z., & Vasey, P. L. (2013). Male androphilia in the ancestral environment: An ethnological analysis. Human Nature, 24, 375–401.
Vasey, P. L. (1995). Homosexual behavior in primates: A review of evidence and theory. International Journal of Primatology, 16, 173–203.
Whiting, J. W. M., Burbank, V. K., & Ratner, M. S. (2009). The duration of maidenhood across cultures. In E. H. Chasdi (Ed.), Culture and human development: The selected papers of John Whiting (pp. 282–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, C. A. (1999). Roman homosexuality: Ideologies of masculinity in classical antiquity. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, G. D., & Cox, D. N. (1983). The child-lovers: A study of paedophiles in society. London: Peter Owen.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rind, B. Hebephilia and Other Chronophilic Puzzles. Arch Sex Behav 46, 47–51 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0889-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0889-x