Are you a Nice Guy who can't seem to get a date because you're too nice?

[Farm Boy]

Depends on the definition you are using for the word "mate." Using the technical biological one you very much cannot.

 

[Borachio]

Oh for sure. I guess that was at least one of the point I was trying to make with what skills are considered "alpha" changing with age. That's probably socialization more than anything. Sexual evolutionary theories are more likely to be correct when analyzing anatomical traits that don't seem to have any direct correlation to survivability. Such as why human testicles are significantly larger proportionally to our closest animal relatives - hence the sperm competition theories.

I'm not sure. I'd have to look it up to confirm. But, iirc, that's the chimpanzee.

According to Diamond, it's related to how much sex you have. Rather unsurprisingly.

And chimps, especially bonobos their close relative, are at it all the time.

Gorillas, make do with one or two (admittedly what must be sublime) days a year. And have correspondingly small testes relative to their body mass.

Human males come somewhere between. But, I would guess, rather closer to chimps than gorillas. And, as it seems appropriate here, YMMV.

Give them a free sex data collection device under the guise of providing something useful while you actually use it to track their sex and serve them advertisements.

I see. And this sex data collection device... er.... operates in what manner? Is it like a pedometer?

 

[Chiteng]

I have always felt that it is up to the WOMAN, to elicit the males interest =)

 

[Borachio]

I agree. Which is why they dress themselves up, I guess.

Though I've know it done with a swift kick to the shins. More than once.

 

[Farm Boy]

I suppose its obvious that you can always have sex w someone and NOT intend to become their mate.

Depending on how you are using the word - while you are having sex with someone you are their mate. You are mating. Unless we get weird about the definition and toss out sex while outside of reproductive fertility, use of birth control, and homosexuality, but that's stretching it even for me.

 

[Zelig]

I see. And this sex data collection device... er.... operates in what manner? Is it like a pedometer?

Wi-fi equipped contraceptive device of your choice.

 

[Borachio]

Well that's how you'd access and record the information. But how do you determine what's triggering it?

 

[Phrossack]

I agree. Which is why they dress themselves up, I guess.

Though I've know it done with a swift kick to the shins. More than once.

I think nobody dresses up for men. Men dress to impress women. Women dress to impress other women.

 

[caketastydelish]

I think nobody dresses up for men. Men dress to impress women. Women dress to impress other women.

Well, this is also an overgenerilzation. Can we discuss this topic without resorting to such things?

 

[JohannaK]

I dress to impress everyone. So women know I'm classy and men know I'm better.

 

[warpus]

To be clear, I'm not saying that sexual selection is nonsense or whatever. I'm saying that I can't trust any specific hypothesis about human evolution that is supposed to predict supposedly universal behaviour among modern humans.

There are many behavioural patterns that are common to most humans, due to our shared history, though. I think you're trying to say that you can't predict anything *too specific* in which case I agree.

There are simply too many unanswered questions. First of all, we're talking about selection pressures that happened 100,000 years ago. We don't know a great deal about that. Secondly, we are extrapolating from a tiny group of people, namely, the observed mating habits of modern Westerners, to the entire human population over all time. Thirdly, we we are proposing that those mating habits are genetic/evolved, rather than socialised/environmental (nature vs nurture). We simply can't be sure about any of these things.

I would love to see a study of middle eastern mating habits for example, in terms of which men women are more likely to be attracted to and how that compares to western women. Not like "western women" can really be taken as a homogenous group either - it's an incredibly diverse population we're talking about.

Evolutionary pressures did not stop 100,000 years ago either. It's an ongoing process. I might be off in my conclusions, but you can't ignore evolutionary and biological influences here. A lot of people just focus on the social and cultural aspects of this - totally forgetting the one thing we ALL have in common - a shred biological ancestry.

Again, I am absolutely not saying that sexual selection is wrong. I am merely saying that there is very little to prove that a statement like "Alpha male cavemen were more successful hunters and acquirers of women than their geeky counterparts" is in any way true. There are simply so many BS theories about selection, especially as it relates to gender roles, that I'm not inclined to believe any of them without a whole lot of proof. That means literature reviews and textbooks, not internet links or newspaper articles. Just because a narrative sounds plausible doesn't mean it's true.

It's a hypothesis, and I think a good one. I'm no antrophologist or biologist, but you can observe similar behaviour in a lot of other species, most notably other mammals. The strongest/most competitive usually get to mate more frequently. That's just how things work in the animal kingdom - and we are a part of it.

We've introduced social and cultural artifacts to our mating rituals, but the underlying biological foundation is there and needs to be a part of the discussion, even if you disagree with my .. conclusions.

By way of example, it's entirely possible that confident men have more sex not because women are attracted to confidence, but because confident men have the confidence to talk to and ask out more women. Is that not just as plausible as the "evolutionary" hypothesis? If this non-evolutionary hypothesis is correct, then it would predict that other traits that cause men to talk to women and ask them out more often will lead to those men having more sex/sexual partners. If you do the field work, you might find that a lot of traits associated with "arsehole-ish" behaviour will also cause those men to talk to more women and therefore having more sex.

From my experience confident men are not only able to approach more women, which seems somewhat obvious.. but they are also sought after by women, moreso than those who are not confident. I don't know what it is, but women can just *smell* confidence. Perhaps it is something in our phermones? I have no idea.

It could be as simple as the woman's subconscious telling her that since the guy is walking and talking like he knows what he's doing and knows what he wants - that he'd make a good father. You don't want someone who doesn't know what he's doing in charge of your offspring.

In the end I'm just putting forth a hypothesis as to why "nice guys" don't end up with women as often, if that's indeed the case. I think that you've got to look at 3 factors: biological/evolutionary, social, and cultural.. and maybe to an extent psychological? Either way, biology is going to be a big part of it. Why wouldn't it? It is to every single other species on the planet.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I have always felt that it is up to the WOMAN, to elicit the males interest =)

So you never show off to attract women's attention?

I think nobody dresses up for men. Men dress to impress women. Women dress to impress other women.

The latter sentence is true, to a great extent. But it's also a "make her envious and jealous" kind of thing, rather than "dress for gaining respect" sort of reason.

 

[warpus]

Yeah, for the longest time I didn't get why women put so much effort into their shoes. Men don't give a crap about what's on women's feet, for the most part.

Once somebody told me that women do it to impress other women a lightbulb went on in my head

 

[aelf]

It could be as simple as the woman's subconscious telling her that since the guy is walking and talking like he knows what he's doing and knows what he wants - that he'd make a good father. You don't want someone who doesn't know what he's doing in charge of your offspring.

Why does the fatherhood thing have to come into the picture? I think a simpler explanation is women (like many people do in other things) fall for the hype. If you act like you're so damn good, then maybe that has some basis in truth.

 

[Ironsided]

I'm a complete ass-hole. It's cheap but it works.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Congratulations, warpus!

(one man on this planet has achieved enlightenment; a few billion more to go... )


BTW, the only times I dress to impress anybody is either for science fiction conventions or important interviews. The rest of the time, I dress in whatever makes me comfortable. I don't even care if my socks don't match - what's more important is if I have one on each foot. And if anybody objects, they have my permission not to look.

 

[warpus]

Why does the fatherhood thing have to come into the picture? I think a simpler explanation is women (like many people do in other things) fall for the hype. If you act like you're so damn good, then maybe that has some basis in truth.

I wouldn't be surprised if both were factors.. but damn, you got me thinking.. I need to be more flamboyant in real life. I need to show girls what I don't got

BTW, the only times I dress to impress anybody is either for science fiction conventions or important interviews. The rest of the time, I dress in whatever makes me comfortable. I don't even care if my socks don't match - what's more important is if I have one on each foot. And if anybody objects, they have my permission not to look.

That is a good philosophy - I am a big believer in function over form, or at least I end up applying it everywhere.

But there's exceptions. When I go to work, for example, I make sure I look good. There's many benefits to doing that. People treat you better, they're friendlier, you command more respect, end up more likely to get noticed by a higher up, etc. It might be stupid, but it works. And since there is that element of function there, I can pat myself on the head and say that function over form principles were not compromised

There's similar dynamics at play wherever you go, but for a lot of things, like you, I just don't care and revert to purely functional attire.. which for the most part means whatever's lying around and feels comfortable.

I have been working on applying the same "dress better, get results" philosophy in other areas in life, but for the most part the world will have to put up with my very non-calvin klein look in terms of the clothes I choose to wear

 

[Ironsided]

Grow a beard.

 

[warpus]

But they call me babyface warpus

 

[Ironsided]

cute