This is the 3rd lecture of [[Rob Henderson]]'s [[PA Psychology of Social Status]] course on [[Peterson Academy]] which is on the topic of status from an evolutionary perspective, with a focus on sexual selection. This can be seen as an extension of [[Keith Campbell]]'s [[Love and Attraction]] lecture. --- ## Competition for mates >[!quote] The mating preferences of one sex set the ground rules of competition in the opposite sex.—David Buss ### Sex differences Men are more likely to accept an invite to sleep with a female stranger. In the 1980s a study has been conducted on a college campus with paid actors asking strangers of the opposite sex whether they would like to go on a date and sleep together. Women said no, and almost all men said yes. In a 2011 study, women were presented celebrity options and asked whether they would sleep with them, and they were just as likely to say yes as any man would to sleeping with a stranger. The reason may be that they have a perceived familiarity towards the celebrities on a parasocial level. Women are more selective than men, as seen in the unequal, bell-curve distribution of likes men receive on dating apps. --- ## Men's competition for status Robert Triver's [[Parental Investment Theory|Parental Investment Theory]] states that the sex that invests the most in the offspring would carry greater risk in the relationship. That is why women are choosier, and that sets the rules for competition amongst males. According to David Buss, women want commitment in the form of love, economic resources and high occupational prestige — indicating ambition and status. Other than that, they want resources, physical protection, care during pregnancy, and physical attractiveness. Men in top earning distribution has 90% chance of finding a partner, and those in the bottom have only 40%. In education, what is happening is that women are graduating more than men, and this leads to a phenomena called educational hypergamy where women marry men that are less educated than them, which is historically not the case. However, they still tend to marry men that earn more than them. ### Physical attractiveness and intimidation In terms of attractiveness, muscle mass is the strongest predictor for physical attractiveness. Physical attractiveness is a sign of good health. Formidability, or how tough-looking and fear inspiring a person is, is a stronger predictor of number of sexual partners than attractiveness. David Puts suggested that many of men's secondary sexual characteristics evolved not to attract women but to compete against other men. Beards is one example of such. In the animal world, we can see this in peacock feathers vs antlers. Peacock feathers evolved to attract, antlers evolved to compete. Men's handgrip strength is surprisingly highly correlated with happiness, health, confidence, and number of sexual partners. Sports and all other forms ritualized contests serve as lek or formal competition amongst men for mates. These can serve as mate selection rituals for women. Being admired by their peers is what makes them attractive. Rory Miller in his book Meditations on Violence outlines predictable patterns that lead to a physical fight between two young males, often strangers, which he calls the male monkey dance which involves calling names, flexing arms, poking fingers, before the actual first punch. Biologist Adam Hart has argued that flexing arms outwards is a way to look domineering by simply taking up larger amounts of space. This male monkey dance is a kind of organic organized ritual, and why these occur is because people have an intuitive sense of a "fair fight," which adds to why male monkey dances and fights usually occur between people of similar size and age. Biologists suggest people want a fair assessment of formidability. Fair fights usually escalate slowly. ### Kindness and generosity David Buss' 37 Culture Study concluded that cross-culturally people wanted their partner to be kind—that is the top of the list. Kindness usually seems to be a baseline trait, or a "bare minimum" per se. There is also study suggesting that men are more likely to donate when observed by women, suggesting that men are intuitive aware of charitability as a desired trait. Medal of Honor recipients are more likely to have more kids than non-recipients, as it is a show of altruism, bravery, and selflessness. On top of the Richard's Wrangham's [[Self-domestication|self-domestication hypothesis]] that explains our transition away from dominance and physical aggression as a race, Geoffrey Miller suggests that it is sexual selection that played a role in ruling out physically aggressive behavior since "people preferred to mate with people who are weren't aggressive or hostile or coercive." He also suggested that generosity is an indicator of [[Costly Signaling|costly signaling]], which in itself shows both resourcefulness and altruism. When the fundraiser is female, men also tend to donate in larger amounts. Large donors often want their name anonymized, but their inside circle would eventually find out, acts as a buried signal that increases perception of kindness and generosity. Caring for a dog is also a signal for kindness. ### Sexy son hypothesis This hypothesis by Richard Dawkins suggests that women select for attractiveness itself, even if they aren't specifically attracted to the man himself. David Buss' experiment showed that women found men surrounded with other women more attractive due to preselection. ### Honesty Honesty is a stronger predictor of relationship satisfaction than emotional intelligence. The question for this is whether I would tell my partner my true feelings even when he or she may not understand them. Dishonest men seem to prefer dishonest women. People scoring high on [[Dark Triad|Dark Triad]] traits score low on authenticity. Being honest is significant in showing that one has the underlying attributes that predictably lead to all the other desirable things. An example would be a junior doctor being more attractive than a lottery winner. #### Signaling Theory The three elements of signaling theory are: 1. People differ in underlying attributes 2. Attributes are visibly unclear 3. People differ in the strength of these signals entitled for these underlying attributes Honest and costly signals are hard to emit. --- ## Women's competition for status Women compete for access to higher status men, access to resources, and higher chance of offspring survival and care. ### Physical attractiveness Which acts as a cue for fertility and youth. Men tend to find women in their early to mid twenties to be the most attractive across a lifespan. Women find men roughly around their age, older if they themselves are young, and younger if they themselves are old to be the most attractive. Tendency to self-enhance, like dressing up and making up, peak during most fertile years. Attractiveness high predicts being on the aggressive end of intrasex aggressive behavior, making females dress defensively in front of other women to avoid judgement and condemnation. Female clothing studies showed that women dressed more modestly before women, but showed more skin before men. ### Fidelity Tania Reynolds coined the term "bless your heart" effect which suggests that women will convey derogatory information about their rivals in concealed and veiled ways while showing positive qualities of herself like compassion and empathy, especially as it involves promiscuity and sexual history. --- ## Intrasex Competiton Strategies These apply to both men and women. They are: 1. Self promotion 2. Competitor derogation ### Men vs Women Competition Men tend to be more direct and overt. Their competition is more physically aggressive in comparison to women. They insult at each other about things that are largely provable, like somebody's car. Women on the other hand insult each other's promiscuity and sexual history, which is something hard to disprove. Women tend to engage in prolonged passive aggression towards their competitors through sabotage and ostracization. Men resolve things much quicker due to the direct nature of their confrontations, and often reconcile shortly after. ### Contest vs Scramble This idea by Joyce Benenson suggests that there are two ways to compete. There is contests which primarily focus is to be better than your competitors, and that might involve undercutting your competition. Scramble, on the other hand, is done in solidarity and involves improving oneself overall than being better than a specific someone. --- ## Male Warrior Hypothesis - Intrasex conflict is equally in both sexes, with males' being more overtly violent - Male in-group conflicts decrease when they are competing against an out-group; Women in-group conflicts do not decrease even when they are competing against an out-group --- The closing remark here is this: the simple, and easy way to increase status is to be a trusted, smart, reliable leader, get a degree from a college and know a lot of things. The easiest way to decrease status is to be an unclean, stupid, dirty thief. --- Back to: [[PA Psychology of Social Status]] Previous Lecture: [[Status Dynamics]] Next Lecture: [[Envy Explored]]