Dallas PUA
The Pickup Artist Playground
Men overspend to attract mates
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Men overspend to attract mates
by Guest » Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:11 pm
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20081210/sc_livescience/oogaoogamenoverspendtoattractmates[/url]
- Guest
by Guest » Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:36 pm
Lol, an acquaintance just posted this on facebook. Funny because he seems like the type of guy to spend a shitload on dates and such.
I think this study is probably due more to risk-taking and impulsiveness as a cause of both irresponsible spending and having more sexual partners instead of irresponsible spending CAUSING more sexual partners, if that makes sense.
I think this study is probably due more to risk-taking and impulsiveness as a cause of both irresponsible spending and having more sexual partners instead of irresponsible spending CAUSING more sexual partners, if that makes sense.
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:13 am
Here we go again down the rabbit hole of evolutionary psycology.. Cave man brain!
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology[/url]
Mating
Given that sexual reproduction is the means by which genes are propagated into future generations, sexual selection plays a large role in the direction of human evolution. Human mating, then, is of interest to evolutionary psychologists who aim to investigate evolved mechanisms to attract and secure mates. Several lines of research have stemmed from this interest, such as studies of mate selection[18][19][20], mate poaching [21], and mate retention [22], to name a few.
Much of the research on human mating is based on parental investment theory [23], which makes important predictions about the different strategies men and women will use in the mating domain (see above under "Middle-level evolutionary theories"). In essence, it predicts that women will be more selective when choosing mates, whereas men will not, especially under short-term mating conditions. This has led some researchers to predict sex differences in such domains as sexual jealousy [24] [25] (however, see also, [26]), wherein females will react more aversively to emotional infidelity and males will react more aversively to sexual infidelity. This particular pattern is predicted because the costs involved in mating for each sex are distinct. Women, on average, should prefer a mate who can offer some kind of resources (e.g., financial, commitment), which means that a woman would also be more at risk for losing those valued traits in a mate who commits an emotional infidelity. Men, on the other hand, are limited by the fact that they can never be certain of their paternity because they do not bear offspring themselves. This obstacle entails that sexual infidelity would be more costly for a man because it is not in his best interest to invest resources in another man's offspring.
Another interesting line of research is that which examines women's mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle[27] [28]. The theoretical underpinning of this research is that ancestral women would have evolved mechanisms to select mates with certain traits depending on their hormonal status. For example, the theory hypothesizes that, during the ovulatory phase of a woman's cycle (approximately days 10-15 of a woman's cycle [29]), a woman who mated with a male with high genetic quality would have been more likely, on average, to produce and rear a healthy offspring than a woman who mated with a male with low genetic quality. These putative preferences are predicted to be especially apparent for short-term mating domains because a potential male mate would only be offering genes to a potential offspring. This hypothesis allows researchers to examine whether women select mates who have characteristics that indicate high genetic quality during the high fertility phase of their ovulatory cycles. Indeed, studies have shown that women's preferences vary across the ovulatory cycle. [b]In particular, Haselton and Miller (2006) showed that highly fertile women prefer creative but poor men as short-term mates. Creativity may be a proxy for good genes [30]. Research by Gangestad et al. (2004) indicates that highly fertile women prefer men who display social presence and intrasexual competition; these traits may act as cues that would help women predict which men may have, or would be able to acquire, resources.[/b]
--
[27] Fertility Favors Creative Intelligence
[url]http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/webdocs/haseltonmiller.pdf[/url]
pp7
However, because the costs and risks of short-term and extra-pair mating extend throughout the cycle, but the good genes benefits can be obtained only during the high fertility phase just before ovulation, women in the high-fertility phase seeking short-term mates should value good genes indicators more highly, relative to good dad indicators (Gangestad et al., 2004). This is not to say that ovulating women will show an absolute preference for all good genes indicators over all good dad indicators, only that good genes indicators should become relatively more attractive and more often favored as fertility increases. This may be manifest as a shift from seeing a male trait as marginally distasteful to seeing it as mildly intriguing (as may be the case with male pheromones or aggressive dominance as fitness indicators), or from seeing it as moderately attractive to seeing it as very arousing (as may be the case with male musical or athletic virtuosity).
Conversely, women in the low-fertility phases should show a relatively stronger preference for male traits that advertise immediate resource availability (Buss, 1989; Geary, 2000; Robson & Kaplan, 2003).
.
.
pp9
Prediction 1: When women rate a man’s desirability as a short-term sexual partner, the higher their fertility (as estimated from their cycle phase), the more they should be willing to trade off wealth in favor of creative intelligence. Given a choice between a creative but poor man and a non-creative but rich man, high-fertility women should tend to choose the former more than low-fertility women.
Prediction 2: When women rate a man’s desirability as a long-term mate, fertility should have little or no effect on the relative importance of creative intelligence versus wealth.
[i][b]As a PUA I only care about 1. so therefore wealth is not inherently useful unless I don't have and/or can't convey my good genes. The most fundamental PUA tactic IMO therefore is to SCREEN for girls at the optimum phase of their cycle. I usually refer to this girl as "live".[/b][/i]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology[/url]
Mating
Given that sexual reproduction is the means by which genes are propagated into future generations, sexual selection plays a large role in the direction of human evolution. Human mating, then, is of interest to evolutionary psychologists who aim to investigate evolved mechanisms to attract and secure mates. Several lines of research have stemmed from this interest, such as studies of mate selection[18][19][20], mate poaching [21], and mate retention [22], to name a few.
Much of the research on human mating is based on parental investment theory [23], which makes important predictions about the different strategies men and women will use in the mating domain (see above under "Middle-level evolutionary theories"). In essence, it predicts that women will be more selective when choosing mates, whereas men will not, especially under short-term mating conditions. This has led some researchers to predict sex differences in such domains as sexual jealousy [24] [25] (however, see also, [26]), wherein females will react more aversively to emotional infidelity and males will react more aversively to sexual infidelity. This particular pattern is predicted because the costs involved in mating for each sex are distinct. Women, on average, should prefer a mate who can offer some kind of resources (e.g., financial, commitment), which means that a woman would also be more at risk for losing those valued traits in a mate who commits an emotional infidelity. Men, on the other hand, are limited by the fact that they can never be certain of their paternity because they do not bear offspring themselves. This obstacle entails that sexual infidelity would be more costly for a man because it is not in his best interest to invest resources in another man's offspring.
Another interesting line of research is that which examines women's mate preferences across the ovulatory cycle[27] [28]. The theoretical underpinning of this research is that ancestral women would have evolved mechanisms to select mates with certain traits depending on their hormonal status. For example, the theory hypothesizes that, during the ovulatory phase of a woman's cycle (approximately days 10-15 of a woman's cycle [29]), a woman who mated with a male with high genetic quality would have been more likely, on average, to produce and rear a healthy offspring than a woman who mated with a male with low genetic quality. These putative preferences are predicted to be especially apparent for short-term mating domains because a potential male mate would only be offering genes to a potential offspring. This hypothesis allows researchers to examine whether women select mates who have characteristics that indicate high genetic quality during the high fertility phase of their ovulatory cycles. Indeed, studies have shown that women's preferences vary across the ovulatory cycle. [b]In particular, Haselton and Miller (2006) showed that highly fertile women prefer creative but poor men as short-term mates. Creativity may be a proxy for good genes [30]. Research by Gangestad et al. (2004) indicates that highly fertile women prefer men who display social presence and intrasexual competition; these traits may act as cues that would help women predict which men may have, or would be able to acquire, resources.[/b]
--
[27] Fertility Favors Creative Intelligence
[url]http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/webdocs/haseltonmiller.pdf[/url]
pp7
However, because the costs and risks of short-term and extra-pair mating extend throughout the cycle, but the good genes benefits can be obtained only during the high fertility phase just before ovulation, women in the high-fertility phase seeking short-term mates should value good genes indicators more highly, relative to good dad indicators (Gangestad et al., 2004). This is not to say that ovulating women will show an absolute preference for all good genes indicators over all good dad indicators, only that good genes indicators should become relatively more attractive and more often favored as fertility increases. This may be manifest as a shift from seeing a male trait as marginally distasteful to seeing it as mildly intriguing (as may be the case with male pheromones or aggressive dominance as fitness indicators), or from seeing it as moderately attractive to seeing it as very arousing (as may be the case with male musical or athletic virtuosity).
Conversely, women in the low-fertility phases should show a relatively stronger preference for male traits that advertise immediate resource availability (Buss, 1989; Geary, 2000; Robson & Kaplan, 2003).
.
.
pp9
Prediction 1: When women rate a man’s desirability as a short-term sexual partner, the higher their fertility (as estimated from their cycle phase), the more they should be willing to trade off wealth in favor of creative intelligence. Given a choice between a creative but poor man and a non-creative but rich man, high-fertility women should tend to choose the former more than low-fertility women.
Prediction 2: When women rate a man’s desirability as a long-term mate, fertility should have little or no effect on the relative importance of creative intelligence versus wealth.
[i][b]As a PUA I only care about 1. so therefore wealth is not inherently useful unless I don't have and/or can't convey my good genes. The most fundamental PUA tactic IMO therefore is to SCREEN for girls at the optimum phase of their cycle. I usually refer to this girl as "live".[/b][/i]
- Guest
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests