There are many evolutionary explanations which connect both masculinity and violence together. In terms of symbolic and mediated forms of violence, such as rituals, it is hard for us to understand why violence isn't committed the same in each culture or country. As Ray states, 'if there is an underlying biological tendency towards masculine violence, this should manifest similarly in different cultures and places, which it does not' (2011:85). This, therefore, arguing against the theory of biological disorders which links men with violence, as if this was the case then all men with these biological traits would be committing the same masculine form of violence, no matter what race, age, culture or part of society they live in. We know that 'the male age-crime curve suggests that offending is concentrated among men in the 11-25 age range' (Ray, 2011:85). .
As the offending period is between these two ages, it also coincides with the fact that this is also the start of the age where boys will go through puberty, experience changes to their body, and male testosterone is at its peak. Towards the older ages of 16-25, this is where men are experiencing new things in their life; perhaps using drugs, or other aggressive types of risk taking. Social and cultural issues also play a huge in part when it comes down to violence being committed in society. Hatty (2000) argues that men, particularly in this age bracket can be more violent than woman due to social issues such as employment, class, social bonds, and family environment. She also argues that whilst these factors are important to the contribution of male violence, the biological aspect of the offender is also as equally important. Furthermore, Pavelka (1995:30), disagrees with this concept as he argues that 'no knowledgeable evolutionary theorist would claim that men (and women) are not responsible for their choices.
