Sexual size dimorphism and reproductive investment by female spiders: A comparative analysis

We investigate the association between female reproductive investment, absolute size, and sexual size dimorphism in spiders to test the predictions of the fecundity-advantage hypothesis. The relationships between absolute size and sexual size dimorphism and aspects of female reproductive output are examined in comparative analyses using phylogenetically independent contrasts. We provide support for the idea that allometry for sexual dimorphism is the result of variation in female size more so than male size. Regression analyses suggest selection for increased fecundity in females. We argue that fecundity selection provides the only general explanation for the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in spiders.

Bronzino’s allegory of ‘Venus and Cupid’: An exemplary image for contemporary sexual health promotion?

Recent sexual health promotion strategies have veered between a negative emphasis on the deleterious consequences of sexually transmitted infections, and a more positive, eroticized approach to safer sex. The differences in approach are starkly reflected in the images chosen to illustrate them. We note that there are problems with both approaches. The main purpose of this review is to demonstrate how this dichotomy was transcended by the sixteenth century Florentine Mannerist painter, Agnolo Bronzino, in his allegory on syphilis

Vetting Sexual Offenders: State Over-extension, the Punishment Deficit and the Failure to Manage Risk

This article examines the state regulation of sexual offenders in the particular context of pre-employment vetting. A successive range of statutory frameworks have been put in place, culminating in the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006, to prevent unsuitable individuals from working with the vulnerable, and children in particular. Contemporary legislative and policy developments are set against a backdrop of broader concerns in the area of crime and justice, namely risk regulation, preventative governance and ‘precautionary logic.’ Proponents of these approaches have largely ignored concerns over their feasibility. This article specifically addresses this fissure within the specific field of vetting. It is argued that ‘hyper innovation’ and state over-extension in this area are particularly problematic and have resulted in exceptionally uncertain and unsafe policies. These difficulties relate principally to unrealistic public expectations about the state’s ability to control crime; unintended and ambiguous policy effects; and ultimately the failure of the state to deliver on its self-imposed regulatory mandate to effectively manage risk.