The module three video clips showcase and point out some of the differences between chimps and bonobos. The videos, though, can basically be summarized into one main idea, that is, of the societal differences between these two primates, and that is the fact that chimpanzees are a patriarchal society and bonobos are a matriarchal society. This subtle difference may sound insignificant; however, it is a crucial factor that we must consider when deciphering why the two primates behave vastly differently when resolving disputes. The documentary hinted that members of a typical patriarchal society tend to behave more violently and competitively. They sought to occupy territories and keep them from the encroachments of others. Moreover, because of the competitive and violent nature that is present in this type of society, female primates are less likely to contribute their softer approach to resolving disputes between members. Consequently, therefore, the male members will have no choice but to suppress the feminine approach and instead resort to the power of the fist-size, which will inevitably turn disputes into total chaos and, at times, deadly.

On the other hand, in a matriarchal society, females are in charge. And therefore, the scale will naturally tilt towards a softer approach. The best example of this is the people of the Stone Age. The method of production during that time was that people either gathered vegetation and fruit from nature or resorted to hunting to feed the family. However, due to the limitation of innovation on weaponry, especially with arch and arrows, which came towards the end of the stone age, males had a very high mortality rate because they had to fight the ferocious prey with bare hands. The best way to counter this high male mortality is for women to provide for the family, and males instead are the homemaker. Because of this, females had a lot more sayings in tribal decision-making, and hence, you see more collaboration between other females in the tribes. Due to this collaborative nature and softer approach, the way of resolving disputes is also a lot more diplomatic. However, it is worth saying that it is nowhere near as diplomatic and intimate as the bonobos in this regard.

Now, with the Stone Age example in mind, we could relate some of the concepts in these videos back to human civilizations—the first question concerns whether humans are Ape-like. Quite frankly speaking, we are. However, it is also important to note that we, the human species, have significantly evolved from our ape-like behaviors that are from the Stone Age humans, which was a period of time that happened more than two to three million years ago. Even if we take into account the Bronze Age, that is also a considerable period of more than five thousand years ago. Nevertheless, the big question remains, did we, the human species, encroach so much into bonobo, chimpanzees, or any other similar species’ habitats that we have inevitably forced some of them into extinction? That is, either with our scientific research, medical research, and perhaps the widespread ecological destruction that we have brought with our massive industrialization. I personally do believe so. Unfortunately, it might continue to be this way until another species that is more superior to us, the humans, come along and eradicate us into extinction.

Responses to the professor or other students:

Response One:

Yeah, I see your point on part two and I totally agree. Although I do want to note that my biggest worries about us, humans are still human nature. I have mentioned a couple of times in my assignments that science can be applied to both harmonious or heinous acts. Quite frankly, when it comes to human nature, I am not particularly a huge fan of optimism. My greatest fear is that some rogue scientists will use these genetically similar primates and use them as test subjects for virology or medical research that they say is for the greater good, but in reality, they are only killing them off without any good meaningful cause that may come back and bite us and harm us, let say, some sort of genetic weaponry that is hugely effective on humans because we’ve already tested them on genetically similar chimps and apes.

Response Two:

I feel in a similar way as you when I listened to that assigned podcast. I do believe that we are apes but only to a certain extent. What I mean by this is that although we share about 98.7 % of our genes with bonobos and 99% with chimps, we are still not one of them when it comes to intelligence. In that podcast, it was stressed that we are able to learn from our surroundings and from the facial expressions of adults from a young age. Quite frankly, this is not a quality that either bonobos or chimps exhibit. So with that said, as much as people may refer to us as descendants of or evolved from apes, that 1% “mutation” per se granted us far more abilities than our original ancestry could ever provide.