NEED FOR CHANGE

The recent political fever in Delhi had caught me too. From a point where we were wondering if the new party’s manifesto made sense, we recently witnessed a never seen before swearing in ceremony of Delhi’s youngest chief minister. In hindsight, though, it seems like the most logical outcome of a confused election. “ At least the newbies deserve a chance,” was the voters state of mind. “Anti-incumbancy” became the buzz word ruling the media waves.

A science blog talking of politics? That too by someone who reads only the science and bollywood pages of the daily newspaper? Don’t worry, for this again is a classic example of a science lover finding the basis of a scientific dialogue everywhere. Argumentative Indian, some may call!

I feel the basis of this unexpected politicial win is mostly because of our need for change. We all love change. We all pine for a break in the monotony. Its wired into our genes.

Which brings me to the next question- if a need for change is so wired in our genes- then is it in also wired into something the genes live for-i.e. reproduction? Is this high rate of infidelity we see in human society orchestrated by our very own selfish gene? Our genes telling us to “spread out” and strengthen the resulting variants?

No no don’t get me wrong. Im not advocating any way of life. I would any day vote for monogamy. Without sounding like a rebel or hurting anyone, im just trying to understand the evolution of monogamy. Because from all that we know of evolution, monogamy would be suicide as it limits the probable chances and variation of pushing your gene pool ahead. Even for the progeny, having a chance to mix with different MHC types would only improve the quality of their resultant genes.

So keeping aside all other aspects, im trying to understand monogamy at the genetic level.

Humans are complex organisms. So keeping the complex human aside, lets study monogamy at the level of some lower organisms (again lower in terms of genetic complexity and not because of some anthropocentric view).

A “pure” study model would be animals who are monogamous by nature. Many birds, goose, wolves etc are known to be monogamous. One partner pairing is rampant among them. Any ecologist will be able to tell you that the need of monogamy arouse from the higher chances of survival of a baby that was reared by parents who have mastered division of labor. The female took care of the baby and did not worry about finding worms to feed it while the male flew out of the nest to look for a hard day’s earned bread. With the mother behind to protect the young one, of course its chances of survival increased tremendously and it got fed well too. Hence we can attribute this increased chance of survival of progeny as a reason that might have caused birds and some other species to evolve this way of life revolving around monogamy. Makes sense evolutionary too.

At present there are not many views other than the child rearing angle in support of monogamy. But what happens when the children are reared?

Even in birds monogamy is now classified under varies tabs with monogamy being used in terms of one partner pairing at a time and doesn’t imply having one partner throughout ones’ life span. Another great trick by evolution actually. Rear the precious gene pool (ie progeny) to its maximum potential by forming monogamous pairs and then mix with another gene set for creating the next progeny with different permutations.

Coming back to my favourite specie- Humans. We seem to have gone a step further and advocated life long monogamy. At least it is taught to be the correct way of life. Cutting a long story short- is there a genetic basis of monogamy in human society where child rearing theory seems to have lost its shine because of the ultra luxury and convenience offered by the modern way of life? So if the life of our children is not being threatened even if both the parents are flying from the “nest” everyday and division of labor among male and female is losing its charm- what is telling us to be monogamous? Why are we comforted in monogamy? Are our genes tricking us again into believing what they want us to or has social conditioning finally blocked us from any genetic gut feeling?

There is no answer available even on Wikipedia right now for this question!

Of course evolution of the modern society is miniscule in terms of evolution of humans. Like I said in my previous blog “Mirror Mirror”, our emotional evolution is happening exponentially and our genes have not yet caught up. So monogamy could be probably another way of life advocated by society to bring some discipline in our lives without any genetic basis. Its like an unsaid universal law. “Forever and ever” is the ending of most fairy tales being fed to children everyday. Walking into the sunset holding hands is the way we all want our lives to be.

But I just had a thought recently that pushed me to investigate a probable genetic angle to monogamy. What if monogamy is helping save a life? It would make sense to evolution then, wont it?

So I started looking into the evolution of virus of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). The most popular among these is the AIDS virus. If you are not monogamous sexually this virus leads you to a death you don’t want to even imagine. And one of the major causes of AIDS in humans is having multiple sexual partners. That’s where monogamy is going to rescue you from a fatal horrible end.

So is monogamy one of nature’s way of telling us to steer clear of sexually transmitted diseases?

To test the “naturality” of monogamy, the most logical question is “Do animals of less complex social makeup also suffer from sexually transmitted diseases?”

The answer is YES.

In fact AIDS is a classical case of zoonosis, ie transfer of a pathogen from a non-human host to humans. Originating in chimpanzees, one bite to a hunter in Africa is postulated to be the origin of HIV in humans. Chimpanzees are largely polygamous. So sexually transmitted diseases might not be a surprise. What about goose, wolves and beavers that are strictly monogamous or birds for that matter? There have been incidences in birds of STDs like Chlamydia but in strictly monogamous animals, there have not been any reports or probably not been a study.

The answer is still vague. But it surely will be another angle that we could consider to answer the riddling question of what could have lead the beautiful birds or the ferocious wolves to devise this way of life? Why do we find happiness in monogamy? Why are we taught to “resist thy temptation”?

Lots of scientists are trying to find out the genetic basis to this question? I know for sure the emotional basis of this way of life is correct. Then why are our genes always pulling us into the devils’ fire? Is this one lone case where its better to ignore  our natural instincts?

So what about other natural instincts? Should we stop listening to our genes which are clearly making us falter?

What about my “happily ever after”??

The answer surely doesn’t lie within- for this question. But it sure is a great debate. A case where nurture Vs nature debate has the scale clearly tipping towards Nurture.

In our span of one human life (of around 100 years) opting for monogamy gives us happiness. But what about seeing this on a larger scale? Over the span of human evolution (which takes millions of years) will monogamy kill us by reducing the permutation and combinations of our genetic material and making us susceptible to some horrible disease of the future? Are the “straying” individuals of today’s society actually helping us save the human race by mixing their gene pool (of course without the knowledge of their wives!!)

Makes for a good debate, right? And I would leave it as I leave all my other blogs…open ended. All comments and thoughts would be welcome….

Lets talk about….eh….monogamy, baby!!

MIRROR MIRROR ON THE WALL....who is the most NATURAL of us all??

Four legged, bipedal, cranial volume of around 1600cc, reproduces sexually, complex social structure with dominance of alpha male- any sane person would find this description of a human absolutely absurb.
However this is how Nature and Evolution view us. As far as nature is concerned,we are doing no more than the tiny bacteria on our kitchen sink. For nature we are both tools to pass on our genes to future generations.

Whether its number, cranial volume or social structure there are ample examples in the animal kingdom that are at par with us or even ahead. Microbial bacteria beat us at the number game anyday. Not to extract the thrill out of your existence but even domestic chicken outnumber us!!! Yet we think we rule the earth.
Our very own ancestors, Neandrathals, had a bigger cranial volume. And dont even mention the social structure issue. Whether its bees dancing or ants following their queen, we are defnitely not the only smart race to come up with a social plan. In fact, many a times I feel that the society of the jungle is far more sophisticated and civilised than what i see on a busy commute to work everyday.

The Renaissance is said to have revived the human spirit. The focus shifted towards celebrating the human race. And this anthropocentric view of society has been deepening since then. Whether its research, its useful only if its aimed at increasing our longetivity. If its technology it better be making our life easy. We are even bending the ecosystem to suit our needs. The ecologists might be screaming at the top of their lungs about green house, ozone holes or destroying someone's habitat. But we cant hear their voices above our own. For gods sake; even Valentines day has more takers than Earth Day!!

Yet despite this undying love for ourselves, we can see society crumbling in front of our own eyes. Crime rates, divorces, stress just seems to be getting higher and higher while inner peace or zen is something we see very little of or search only every Sunday at our Art of Living class.

If over billions of years of our existence should have taught us anything, it should have been to decrease the mayhem within our social and organic selves. Clearly that is not the case. Are we headed towards a whirlpool that is going to suck the very life force out of us? Are we so clouded with everyday life that we dont see the bigger picture? What is the reason of this discord?

I shall put the question a little bit differently. It will help you understand where im heading.

Is it just us or does Nature also share our anthropocentric viewpoint? Does Evolution also consider us superior than any other gene pool?

The answer is No. Im afraid not. As far as Nature is concerned, the day we stop making "sense" to her, she will spit us out like a dead fly. And while evolution might be making a heartless cold distinction among our species in coherence with survival of the fittest, it makes no distinction across species. For evolution, all species are alike. They are nothing but organic vehicles waiting to push their gene pool forward.

And I think its this discord between how Nature and we veiw ourselves that is causing the unhappiness.

Let me link Anthropology and Evolutionary science a bit to show where im heading.

A married couple works in the same office, has the exact same salary and working hours and gives equal contribution at the work front both find themselves fighting over a mere household chore. When they are equals at work, in society and in each others head; then why is making dinner an obvious wife thing. In fact, come to think of it; she did have that extra board meeting than he did that day. Then why is she expected to think of the menu, lay down the table and cook for the family while all he helps is in chopping the chicken?
I have an answer to this age old question among couples- Evolution, my dear Watson, Evolution!

Male and female brains are wired up through years of evolution. Male brain is the hunter gatherer while female brain is wired to be the home maker. Over years of living in a society we might have come to a piont where we can teach the male brain to do some home making chores yet we are at our core what our genes are telling us to do. "Natural instinct" if i may call it.

Let me make it clear that Im in no way against women liberation. Being a working mother, an entrepreneur and a neuroscience graduate I am nothing but women rights put together! Im just saying that male and female brains are wired differently. They are of the same size, capacity and capabilities. Just wired differently

And the day we start respecting this fact, life will make more sense. The fact that at our core we are just slaves to our biochemical makeup.

Ask an infant and you will know instantly. An infant is nothing but genetic material. 100% natural and in very close touch with his instincts. Thats why an infant in his first few months of survival clearly picks mother over father. Nobody told him so. Even if you leave aside the 9 months of nurturing theory away; nobody can tell you more clearly than an infant that males and females have clear distinct roles- none less or more important than the other. Just different.

The problem is that society has evolved faster than our genes have. The wheel gave way to the jet age that tranformed into the internet age. While organically, we really dint catch up so fast. After all genetic mutation, natural selection and evolution doesnt happen in a matter of a few decades. Iam talking of billions of years of selection, trying to keep pace with few years of social rapid lane changing.

And though society and humans started together, they seem to have parted ways long back.

So next time you feel this giant black hole inside you and turn to search for inner peace; just know that the discord lies between what society is saying and what your genes are guiding you to do. They might not be in tandem always.

I dont know what the answer should be when you face such a dilemma. Its clearly a matter of personal choice. However, I do know for sure that if you are strong enough and have the guts to listen to what millenniums of years of evolution is telling you through your genes, then you clearly are not the kinds that will let a few years of social polishing bother you.

I leave the debate open for discussions.
Keep it natural. Keep it real-
Lahar