Kanzi: The Ape at the Brink of the Human Mind (19 page)

Throughout this time, I was enchanted by the ready ability of the bonobos to interpret body language and facial expressions accurately. I had known common chimpanzees with similar skills, though only those raised by human caretakers. Chimpanzees raised in the wild, or by their mothers in large social groups, seemed to have difficulty recognizing laughter, smiles, frowns, and many other human facial expressions. Bipedal stances were also threatening to them, as was a direct gaze in the eyes. Yet these wild-caught bonobos had no difficulty understanding the expression of these or other more complex emotions such as consternation, puzzlement, or gratitude, nor did I have difficulty seeing these emotions in their attitudes. We shared a language from the very beginning, albeit one that
referenced mood and intent rather than specific objects. Had this communicative channel not been available, the tactic of relating my emotions to their concerns simply would not have worked. In the two weeks it had taken from first contact to entering the cage, I had therefore already learned that the nonverbal language of the bonobo was far more humanlike than that of common chimps.

The difference in temperament between the two species also quickly became apparent. The story of the plastic pails is a good illustration. From the very beginning, the bonobos had been given a plastic feeding pail in their cage, but it soon became much more than that. They used it for holding drinking water, inverted it as a seat, used it as a repository for urine, placed it over the head as a blind, carried it on the stomach as if it were an infant, played with it as a toy, and much more. The neighboring common chimps had been able to observe all these activities, and we wondered whether they would imitate the bonobos’ antics if we gave them a pail. They didn’t. Instead, they used the pails as props in aggressive displays, shaking them in the air, slamming them against the cage sides, and kicking them across the floor. Bosondjo was fascinated by these simian pyrotechnics. He picked up his own pail, carried it to a position in his cage from where he had a good view of the common chimps, and sat on it with his elbows on his knees and his chin on his hands, watching. When the display was over, Bosondjo got up, picked up the pail, shook it, and pushed it noisily across the floor, and then threw it at Matata. Bosondjo was obviously imitating what he had seen, but without the common chimps’ intensity and aggression. He didn’t do it again, and his pail remained intact for a long time. The common chimps quickly destroyed their pails.

I was helped in my study of the bonobos by Beverly Wilkerson and Roger Bakeman, and before long we were able to publish a series of papers that presented the first insights into the behavior of this extraordinary species. By this time, the mid-to late 1970s, biologists were very familiar with the social behavior of common chimpanzees, primarily through the pioneering efforts of Jane Goodall. Chimp society was seen to be
very much male dominated, with readily identifiable dominance rankings among both males and females. Each individual’s social interaction was often directed to testing its status in the dominance hierarchy. High-ranking individuals gained preferred access to food and, particularly important for males, to mates.

Common chimpanzee females are receptive to sexual overtures only a few days each month, and during this time they evidence a large pink sexual swelling. Such females often find themselves in the presence of a covey of interested suitors, all of whom may mate with them repeatedly. However, Jane Goodall and Carolyn Tutin have shown that multiple matings are not the only strategy employed by male chimpanzees. They sometimes monopolize a female in estrus by insisting that she accompany them on a “safari” or a journey
en deux
, during which other males are studiously avoided. This ensures the male singular access at the proper time.

Even with just Lokelema, Matata, and Bosondjo as our small social group of bonobos to observe, it quickly became evident that bonobos in the wild had to have a very different group structure and that sexuality functioned in a distinctly bonobo manner. These early observations were later borne out by the field studies of Takayoshi Kano, Suehisa Kuroda, Takeshi Furuichi, and Nancy Thompson-Handler. Simply put, bonobos are more egalitarian and utilize sexuality for a much wider range of purposes than common chimps. Sex—both heterosexual and homosexual—has expanded far beyond its initial function as a means of reproduction among bonobos. It plays a central role in bonobo society, as a tool for bonding all individuals together.

Bonobo life is centered around the offspring. Unlike what happens among common chimps, all members of the bonobo social group help with infant care and share food with infants. If you are a bonobo infant, you can do no wrong. This high regard for infants gives bonobo females a status that is not shared by common chimpanzee females, who must bear the burden of child care all alone. Bonobo females and their infants form the core of the group, with males invited in to the extent that they are cooperative and helpful. High-status males are
those that are accepted by the females, and male aggression directed toward females is rare even though males are considerably stronger.

Among both humans and bonobos, sexuality has evolved as a sort of multifaceted behavioral glue. If we disregard the aspect of genital contact for a moment and think of bonobo sexuality as “full body hugging,” we can get a closer glimpse of the many facets of what we call “sex” in bonobos. Just as humans hug each other because they are happy, sad, or excited, and just as we hug others to comfort and reassure them, to greet them, to say goodbye, to show that we love them or are attracted to them, so do bonobos hug other bonobos in all such situations. Unlike ourselves, however, bonobos do not wear clothes. Consequently, when they engage in a full body hug, it is accompanied by some form of mutual genital contact, which is naturally stimulating.

Sexual arousal, excitation, and release in the bonobo is also a very rapid phenomenon, lasting about as long as most full body hugs in our own species. However, unlike humans, bonobos do not grasp the relationship inherent between sexual activity and reproduction. Therefore, they are freed from understanding anything other than the immediate consequences of their sexual expression. Humankind, on the other hand, has recognized this link and consequently cannot escape the implications of its sexuality. Offspring require extraordinarily long-term resources of time and energy. Activities that lead to offspring production will inherently, among humans, become subject to regulation and limitation of various forms because of the recognition that sexuality is linked to reproduction.

In the case of humans, not only is there a recognition of the link between sexual activity and offspring, but the human female is not physically equipped to provide for offspring without assistance. Human infants are much larger than ape infants and more difficult to carry as they do not cling. Consequently, a human female must be able to feed and defend herself while constantly supporting an infant who cannot manage to hang on while its mother engages in the activities necessary to sustain them both. For this reason, the assistance of human males, at least under natural conditions, is critical to survival of human offspring. Thus human sexuality not only
leads to offspring, it also leads to the need to help the female rear those offspring if they are to survive. The realization of the implications of sexuality is a relatively recent product of the human intellect, and has not had time to become ingrained into the human biology. That is to say, we humans do not invent proscriptions upon our sexuality because we are genetically inclined to do so; rather, we invent such proscriptions because our intellect recognizes the need for their existence.

Freed from man’s knowledge and responsibility for totally helpless infants, and equipped with a libido that is rapidly activated and released, bonobos are as free to engage in copulatory activity as a means of social expression as humans are to engage in full body hugging without mutual genital contact. Some primatologists have sought to “explain” bonobo sexuality by saying that it serves to reduce tension and defuse aggression. Such explanations beg the issue because they serve only to “explain” things that are themselves created by the conceptual framework in the mind of the observer. That is, once one assumes that tension exists, it therefore follows that it must be “released.” Such a perspective inadvertently leads to the assumption that many behaviors, such as grooming or sex, exist for the purpose of “tension release.” It is equally plausible to assume that the need to reproduce generates sexual activity and that sexual activity itself generates tension.

Bonobos, like humans, are concerned about who is copulating with whom, and sexual jealousy among and between sexes is present. Likewise, the advances of some individuals are refused, while those of others are accepted. These events produce among group members differences of feeling that require resolution. However, it is not the case that screaming and fighting typically precede sexual activity among bonobos. Bonobo sexuality, like human sexuality, is far too complex a phenomenon to be explained by the concept of “tension reduction.”

Not only do bonobos utilize sexuality as a social glue, but they are keenly aware of their sexuality. Both sexes evidence interest in, and awareness of, the effect of sexual interactions on themselves and on their partners. Unlike common chimps, bonobo females initiate copulation just as frequently as males, and often with other females.

Also unlike common chimps, bonobos frequently copulate face to face, as humans do. Adding to their human aspect, bonobos peer intently into their partner’s face prior to and during copulation, clearly monitoring change of expression. For instance, the intensity and frequency of thrusting is altered by changes in facial expression. Copulating pairs vocalize too, in clear communicative ways. We recorded at least three facial expressions and four vocalizations associated with copulation.

When Beverly Wilkerson and I reported our work in 1978 we said, “These observations strongly suggest that the pygmy chimpanzee is responsive not only to his own internal physiological feedback during copulation, but also to the subjective experiences of the partner.”
¹⁵
I have no doubt that common chimpanzees are cognitive creatures, experiencing some degree of self-awareness and subjectivity. But this study of socio-sexual behavior was my first strong realization that subjectivity might be even keener in bonobos.

The existence of face-to-face copulation and prolonged eye contact would be sufficient to label bonobos as unique among nonhuman primates. But their sexual behavior has many other features that also set them apart. Most noticeable is the variability of copulatory partners and positions. Homosexual relationships between females are also a particularly obvious and prevalent aspect of bonobo life. Female-female friendships are cemented in this way and lead to a peaceful sharing of resources among females. Homosexual “copulation” between bonobo females (termed “GG rubbing” by primatologists) contains all of the components of heterosexual activity, except for intromission. Watching this behavior in Lokelema and Matata, I could see that the clitoris of the female became visibly engorged and erect and was rubbed vigorously against the genitalia of her companion. As in heterosexual copulation, the partners in GG rubbing gazed intently at each other and clearly derived pleasure and satisfaction from the activity. They also appeared to achieve climax, as evidenced by the uncontrolled rhythmic contractions that preceded termination of the GG rubbing. “The pygmy chimpanzee is the only one, out of 200 species of primate,
to devise this behavior,” said Kano when he later described GG rubbing he observed at Wamba, “and whenever they are delightedly absorbed in this ‘lesbian’ behavior, they seem proud of their splendid invention.”
¹⁶

Bonobos extend their sexual inventiveness further, to include male-male mounting, multiple positions in male-female copulation, and multi-individual heterosexual and homosexual copulatory bouts. Sexual activity is usually contagious in bonobo society; often, when one couple starts to copulate, the rest of the group members express interest in some way. In particular, GG rubbing between females seems to arouse sexual interest in males. Some individuals may initiate copulation with another partner, others may run close to the first couple, touch them, and scream in unison, or even join in with them. For instance, when Lokelema and Bosondjo copulated, Matata frequently joined in by rubbing her vulva against Bosondjo’s back or mouth. In the larger group at the San Diego Zoo, a copulating couple frequently found themselves with as many as five young females vigorously rubbing their genitalia against various parts of the couple’s bodies. Among bonobos, in sexuality there is an “interconnectedness of emotion and feeling” that goes considerably beyond any related behavior in other ape species—except perhaps ourselves. One cannot help but feel that at times they are simply seeking to share in each other’s ecstasy, and that by so doing they heighten their own subjective experiences—much as many human cultures do during the nonsexual sharing of religious expression.

The more I observed copulatory bouts between bonobo couples, the more it became clear that the positions they assumed were not achieved passively. One or the other of the couple had a clear notion of the preferred position and used a series of gestures to indicate what was required. These gestures were of three types. First, an individual might place his or her hand on the partner’s body, and move it in some deliberate way. This kind of positioning movement is probably the most primitive of communicative hand movements. The second type is more sophisticated, and involves a combination of touch and iconic hand motions, which are gestures indicating desired
movement. The initiating individual lightly touches with one hand the part of the partner’s body that is to move, and then with the other hand uses an iconic motion to indicate the nature of the desired movement. Last are completely iconic hand motions. Such gestures include moving the hand and forearm across the body, standing bipedally and waving the arms out from the body, and raising the arm with the palm down.