Human Sex Differences in Height: Evolution due to Gender Hierarchy?

Part of the Crossroads of Knowledge book series (CROKNOW, volume 1)


Putting together data and models in fields of research as diverse as social and biological anthropology, gender and feminist studies, evolutionary biology, nutritional sciences, and obstetrics, this chapter proposes that a convincing hypothesis for the observed human sex differences in height is actually missing in scientific arenas because of the absence of an inclusive research. It argues that the most realistic hypothesis is that of gendered practices’ effects on the long term: unequal protein intake between men and women but also stature discrimination on small men and tall women. Nutritional inequalities are well documented in classical ethnology. But they seemed not being worth deserving interpretation within the framework of global gender inequality. From a gender theory standpoint, nutritional inequalities should be suspected to be present as an inevitable consequence of the gender order. Asking the still underestimated question of how unnatural selections are able to shape human biology points specifically on a renewal of “sex and gender” epistemologies that envision sex as a product of natural selection or as a pure scientific construction. Setting the problem another way has direct concern for contemporary public debates stuck to a particular social/biological articulation of gendered identities.


Small Stature Sexual Size Dimorphism Female Size Female Pelvis False Idea 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Plavcan, M. J. (2001). Sexual dimorphism in primate evolution. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 44, 25–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Diamond, J. (1992). The third chimpanzee: The evolution and future of the human animal. New York: Harper & Collins.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Touraille, P. (2008). Hommes grands, femmes petites: une évolution coûteuse. Les régimes de genre comme force sélective de l’adaptation biologique. Paris: Maison des sciences de l’Homme.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pilcher, J., & Whelehan, I. (2004). Fifty key concepts in gender studies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter. On the discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clutton-Brock, T. (1994). The costs of sex. In R. V. Short & E. Balaban (Eds.), The differences between the sexes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murray, C. J. L., & Lopez, A. D. (1998). Health dimensions of sex and reproduction. The global burden of sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, maternal conditions, perinatal disorders and congenital anomalies. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gould, S. J. (1985). The Flamingo’s smile: Reflections in natural history. New York: Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex (1st ed.). London: John Murray.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martin, R. D., Willner, L. A., & Dettling, A. (1994). The evolution of sexual size dimorphism in primates. In R. V. Short & E. Balaban (Eds.), The differences between the sexes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ralls, K. (1976). Mammals in which females are larger than males. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 51, 245–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gustafsson, A., & Lindenfors, P. (2006). Human size evolution: No evolutionary allometric relationship between male and female stature. Journal of Human Evolution, 47, 253–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fairbairn, D., Blanckenhorn, W. U., & Székely, T. (Eds.). (2007). Sex, size and gender roles: Evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Badyaev, A. V. (2002). Growing apart: An ontogenetic perspective on the evolution of sexual size dimorphism. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17, 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Allen, H. L., et al. (2010). Hundreds of variants clustered in genomic loci and biological pathways affect human height. Nature, 467, 832–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alexander, R. D., Hoogland, J. L., Howard, R. D., Noonan, K. M., & Sherman, P. W. (1979). Sexual dimorphisms and breeding systems in pinnipeds, ungulates, primates, and humans. In N. Chagnon & W. Irons (Eds.), Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective. North Scituate: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clutton-Brock, T. (1985). Size, sexual dimorphism, and polygyny in primates. In W. L. Jungers (Ed.), Size and scaling in primate biology. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nettle, D. (2002). Women’s height, reproductive success and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in modern humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 269, 1919–1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guégan, J.-F., Teriokhin, A. T., & Thomas, F. (2000). Human fertility variation, size-related obstetrical performance and the evolution of sexual stature dimorphism. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 267, 2529–2535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martorell, R., Delgado, H. L., Valverde, V., & Klein, R. E. (1981). Maternal stature, fertility and infant mortality. Human Biology, 53, 303–312.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sear, R., Allal, N., & Mace, R. (2004). Height, marriage and reproductive success in Gambian women. Research in Economic Anthropology, 23, 203–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hamilton, M. E. (1975). Variation among five groups of Amerindians in the magnitude of sexual dimorphism of skeletal size. Ph.D. thesis. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McHenry, H. (1996). Sexual dimorphism in fossil hominids and its socioecological implications. In J. Steele & S. Shennan (Eds.), The archaeology of human ancestry. Power, sex and tradition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wolfe, L. D., & Gray, P. J. (1982). A cross-cultural investigation into the sexual dimorphism of stature. In R. L. Hall (Ed.), Sexual dimorphism in Homo sapiens. A question of size. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carpenter, K. J. (1994). Protein and energy. A study of changing ideas in nutrition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stanford, C. B. (1999). The hunting apes. Meat eating and the origin of human behaviour. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Brightman, R. (1996). The sexual division of foraging labor: Biology, taboo, and gender politics. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 38, 687–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Whitehead, H. (2000). Food rules. Hunting, sharing and tabooing game in Papua New-Guinea. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marlowe, F. (2010). The Hadza Hunter-gatherers of Tanzania. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Connell, R. (1987). Gender and power. Society, the person and sexual politics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Camporesi, P. (1989). Bread of dreams: Food and fantasy in early modern Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Touraille, P. (2009). Coûts biologiques d’une petite taille pour les Homo sapiens femelles: nouvelles perspectives sur le dimorphisme sexuel de stature. In T. Heams, P. Huneman, G. Lecointre, & M. Silberstein (Eds.), Les Mondes darwiniens. L’évolution de l’évolution. Paris: Éditions Syllepse.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CNRS, UMR 7206, Equipe d’anthropologie génétique, Muséum national d’histoire naturelleParis cedex 05France

Personalised recommendations