>> Support material: Chapter 3
Public Sociology links
- Home
- Using this website
- About the book
- About the editors
- Gallery of theorists
- Support material
- 1. The sociological gaze
- 2. Sociological foundations
- 3. Contemporary sociological theorists and theories
- 4. Sociological investigations
- 5. Socialisation and the new genetics
- 6. Youth transitions and youth culture
- 7. Families and intimate relationships
- 8. Consumption and lifestyles
- 9. Sporting life
- 10. Hybrid identities in a globalised world
- 11. Class and inequality in Australia
- 12. The gender order
- 13. Ethnicity and belonging
- 14. Race and reconciliation in Australia
- 15. Religion and spirituality
- 16. Deviance, crime, and social control
- 17. The social basis of health and illness
- 18. Globalisation, power, and social movements
- 19. Global risk and the surveillance state
- 20. Working 24/7
- 21. Media and popular culture
- 22. Educating society
- 23. Urbanisation, community, and rurality
- 24. A sociological toolkit
- 25. Writing a sociological essay
- Bonus chapter: Sociology and the environment
- Instructor’s resources
- Inspection copies
- Buy this book
- Feedback
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Case studies | Video clips | Weblinks | Further reading | Podcasts |
Case study
Footballers behaving badly: A view by an evolutionary geneticist
Andrew Baker (2009), an evolutionary geneticist, argued in The Australian newspaper that the bad behaviour of many footballers, particularly towards women, was fundamentally an outcome of their genes. He stated:
In creating the modern footballer, we have selected for a group of strong, young, risk-taking men and heaped on them valuable resources: fame, fortune, and women... Size, strength and violence are favoured over attributes more suited to our sanitised society. The very characteristics we promote and favour in our footballers run counter to modern morality. Yet we expect the raw brutes we create and reward with riches to switch off primal sexual urges in their feeblest moments.
When it comes to sex, women are generally choosy whereas men prefer not to discriminate. This is the evolutionary foundation on which gender wars are waged: women have a rare resource they aim to protect (an egg) whereas men have a common resource they wish to promote (their sperm).
...
If the urge to spread genes far and wide lies restlessly at the evolutionary core of all males, some footballers may indulge such instincts more than other males because society has loosened moral constraints that would otherwise guide their behaviour.
...
But women ultimately control the precious resource that is themselves and they may need to guard it more zealously.
Alcohol lubricates desire and the frustration men feel in suppressing their urge for indiscriminate sex... Such frustration is more likely to find an explosive outlet in a male used to indulging deep primal instincts of team battle and lust.
Baker claims that his argument is not about making excuses for violent male behaviour or an attempt to blame their female victims. You can read the whole article online at the reference below. Do you believe him?
Reference
Baker, A. 2009, ‘Society is in League with Footy Antics’, The Australian [online edition], May 20, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25508060-25192,00.html
Discussion questions
- What sociological arguments and contemporary sociological theories could you draw upon to counter Baker’s views?
- How widespread do you think such biologically determinist views are?
