Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Male Protection

  • Martha Lucia Borras GuevaraEmail author
  • Carlota Batres
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_280-1



The act through which males protect themselves and/or others.


Natural selection favors those physical and psychological traits that are beneficial in terms of reproduction and survival (Dobzhansky 1956). Human ancestral times were characterized by prevalent violence, consisting both of within and between group conflict (Duntley and Shackelford 2012; LeBlanc 2003; Puts 2010). As a result, both men’s and women’s psychology could have been influenced by such violent contexts, leading to preferences for certain physical traits related to protection from partners or allies (men’s: Borráz-León et al. 2014; women’s: Buss 1994).

Male Protection for Females

On average, women are shorter, smaller in size, less aggressive, and have a weaker body composition compared to men (Daly and Wilson 1988). Evidence from archeological archives suggests that damage of property, homicide, and rape were common practices during human...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Archer, J., & Benson, D. (2008). Physical aggression as a function of perceived fighting ability and provocation: An experimental investigation. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archer, J., & Thanzami, V. (2009). The relation between mate value, entitlement, physical aggression, size and strength among a sample of young Indian men. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 30, 315–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Batres, C., & Perrett, D. (2014). The influence of the digital divide on face preferences in El Salvador: People without internet access prefer more feminine men, more masculine women, and women with higher adiposity. PLoS One, 9(7), e100966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bleske-Rechek, A., & Buss, D. (2001). Opposite-sex friendship: Sex differences and similarities in initiation, selection, and dissolution. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1310–1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borras-Guevara, M., Batres, C., & Perrett, D. (2017a). Aggressor or protector? Experiences and perceptions of violence predict preferences for masculinity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38, 481–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borras-Guevara, M. L., Batres, C., & Perrett, D. I. (2017b). Domestic violence shapes Colombian women’s partner choices. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 71(12), 175.Google Scholar
  7. Borráz-León, J., Cerda-Molina, A., Hernández-López, L., Chavira-Ramírez, R., & de la O-Rodríguez, C. (2014). Steroid hormones and facial traits in the recognition of a potential rival in men. Ethology, 120, 1013–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brewster, L., Milner, S., Mollerstrom, W., Saha, T., & Harris, N. (2002). Evaluation of spouse abuse treatment: Description and evaluation of the Air Force Family Advocacy Programs for spouse physical abuse. Military Medicine, 167, 464–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  10. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  11. Dobzhansky, T. (1956). What is an adaptive trait? American Naturalist, 90, 337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duntley, J. D., & Shackelford, T. K. (2012). Adaptations to avoid victimization. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fessler, D., Holbrook, C., & Gervais, M. (2014). Men’s physical strength moderates conceptualizations of prospective foes in two disparate societies. Human Nature, 25, 393–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fink, B., Neave, N., & Seydel, H. (2007). Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women. American Journal of Human Biology, 19, 82–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Greiling, H., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Women’s sexual strategies: The hidden dimension of extra-pair mating. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 929–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Holzleitner, I., & Perrett, D. (2016). Perception of strength from 3D faces is linked to facial cues of physique. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37, 217–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keeley, H. (1996). War before civilization: The myth of the peaceful savage. Oxford: Oxford University Press US.Google Scholar
  18. LeBlanc, S. (2003). Constant battles: The myth of the peaceful, noble savage. New York: St. Martins Press.Google Scholar
  19. Li, Y., Bailey, D. H., Winegard, B., Puts, D. A., Welling, L. L., & Geary, D. C. (2014). Women’s preference for masculine traits is disrupted by images of male-on-female aggression. PLoS One, 9, e110497–e110504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Little, A., DeBruine, L., & Jones, B. (2013). Environment contingent preferences: Exposure to visual cues of direct male-male competition and wealth increase women’s preferences for masculinity in male faces. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 34, 193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lorber, F., & O’Leary, D. (2004). Predictors of the persistence of male aggression in early marriage. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 329–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Perilloux, C., Duntley, J. D., & Buss, D. M. (2012). The costs of rape. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 71841, 1099–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Puts, D. (2010). Beauty and the beast: Mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 157–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ryder, H., Maltby, J., Rai, L., Jones, P., & Flowe, H. (2016). Women’s fear of crime and preference for formidable mates: How specific are the underlying psychological mechanisms? Evolution and Human Behavior, 37, 293–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sell, A., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2009). Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 15073–15078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Snyder, J. K., Kirkpatrick, L., & Barrett, H. C. (2008). The dominance dilemma: Do women really prefer dominant mates? Personal Relationships, 15, 425–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Snyder, J., Fessler, D., Tiokhin, L., Frederick, D., Lee, S., & Navarrete, C. (2011). Trade-offs in a dangerous world: Women’s fear of crime predicts preferences for aggressive and formidable mates. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32, 127–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. (2000). A natural history of rape. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Watkins, C., Jones, B., & DeBruine, L. (2010). Individual differences in dominance perception: Dominant men are less sensitive to facial cues of male dominance. Personality Individual Differences, 49, 967–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1985). Competitiveness, risk taking, and violence: The young male syndrome. Ethology and sociobiology, 6(1), 59–73.Google Scholar
  31. Windhager, S., Schaefer, K., & Fink, B. (2011). Geometric morphometrics of male facial shape in relation to physical strength and perceived attractiveness, dominance, and masculinity. American Journal of Human Biology, 23, 805–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zlotnick, C., Kohn, R., Peterson, J., & Pearlstein, T. (1998). Partner physical victimization in a national sample of American families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 156–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of St. AndrewsSt. AndrewsUK
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyFranklin and Marshall CollegeLancasterUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Tara DeLecce
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyOakland UniversityRochesterUSA