Ok. So here are some facts about chimpanzees.

1) They are much stronger than humans are. Yes, they are smaller, but pound for pound they are eight times as strong as humans.

2) Females go into heat and display obvious and visible signs of their fertility.

3) Elderly females are considered more attractive than younger ones, who can have more difficulty getting males to mate with them.

3) They have tribes with male sexual dominance hierarchies based upon combat. The males who fight the best end up at the top of the hierarchy and have the greatest access to females.

4) Mating occurs in public except for low ranking males, who may have to sneak away with a female in order to have sex.


Human females do not show obvious signs of reproductive readiness. Human males do not need those signs to become sexually aroused. We also do not mate in public.


Given these facts, I propose the sneaky fucking hypothesis, (which I name in honor of a butthead of an anthropology professor I had who used to giggle like a teenager when he talked about men unknowingly raising the children of other men)

What I'm suggesting is that a subpopulation evolved withinn the primate precursor group to humans and chimpanzees. That group consisted of females that would become fertile without the stronger males noticing (perhaps at a younger age), and a group of weaker males that would mate with these females in private. Basically, the human race would then be the result of branch of loser child molesters forming a splinter group. Their secretiveness allowed them to mate successfully, but their lower strength left them on the losing side of tribal wars, and as a result they were forced out the natural jungle habitat of primates and into the plains.

(Someone else has probably already thought this up, but I'm too lazy to go look for it.)