You have brought such a mass of facts to support your view, and have
argued it so fully, that I hardly think it necessary for you to do more.
Truth will prevail, as you as well as I wish it to do. I will only make
one or two remarks. The word "voluntary" was inserted in _my proofs
only_, in order to distinguish clearly between the two radically
distinct kinds of "sexual selection." Perhaps "conscious" would be a
better word, to which I think you will not object, and I will alter it
when I republish. I lay no stress on the word "voluntary."
Sound- and scent-producing organs in males are surely due to "natural"
or "automatic" as opposed to "conscious" selection. If there were
gradations in the sounds produced, from mere noises, up to elaborate
music--the case would be analogous to that of "colours" and "ornament."
Being, however, comparatively simple, Natural Selection, owing to their
use as a guide, seems sufficient. The louder sound, heard at a greater
distance, would attract or be heard by more females, or it may attract
other males and lead to combats _for_ the females, but this would not
imply _choice_ in the sense of rejecting a male whose stridulation was a
trifle less loud than another's, which is the essence of the theory as
applied by you to colour and ornament.
Pages:
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465