More on the Shallowness of Men, or Which Gender is More Shallow: Men or Women?

I wrote about this before (The Manosphere is Not as Shallow as You Think  and the Male Apex Fallacy?), but I feel the question remains. Who’s more shallow ? And just how shallow are guys?

Well, the evopsych book “Natural History of Rape” gave me some clues. It makes very good sense. The short answer is that men are both shallow, and incredibly non-shallow. And the same can be said about women.

When a species of animal evolves, the genes that help them survive and reproduce are selected for. When reading the following, look back on this fact. Whatever helps one reproduce, and reproduce well, is selected for. Whatever hinders successful reproduction, is selected against. It is also important to remember that humans aren’t thinking all these things consciously, they are simply expressed in behavior. For example, a man doesn’t think “Oh, I better seduce this lady, she totally has good genes, it means she will have a healthy baby with me”, he thinks “Wow, she’s hot”.

Within a species of animals, the sex that provides the biggest minimum parental effort evolves to be more discriminating in whom they copulate with. In our species, that’s women, because to reproduce, they have to be pregnant for nine months, and give birth to the baby. To understand why women are more picky with sex partners, it must be remembered that women can only make very few kids per lifetime (like 10-20 maybe?..). Wasting those precious few shots at reproduction is not a good idea. Wasting them on ugly men is a bad idea (crappy genes). Wasting them on men who can’t feed their babies is not a good idea. Those women who had sex with men with better genes outreproduced women who had sex with men with bad genes, because bad genes means all sorts of dysfunction, both physical and mental. Women who had sex with men with resources outreproduced women who fucked poor men, because to raise kids, you need resources.

The sex that provides the smaller minimum parental effort becomes less discriminating in whom they have sex with. In our species, that’s men, as their minimum parental effort is 5 minutes of pleasure. To reproduce, they need to convince a member of the opposite sex to use their substantial parental effort on THEIR babies. They can do that by having very good genes that are worth the pregnancy. Or they can offer something, like resources. Or they can be a man with a lot of influence in society, who can protect them from rape by men with unworthy genes, and therefore from waste of their limited shots at reproduction.

Unlike women, men can potentially reproduce 100s of times, and having sex with the wrong woman isn’t a big hit to their overall legacy. In fact, if the guy isn’t surrounded by hot young women at all times, he can afford to use some time on an ugly or older woman – it will help his reproductive success more than it will harm it. However, men who spent more time pursuing young (fertile), symmetric (better genes) women outreproduced men who spent less time on them, giving rise to male sexual preferences. So, while men are much less picky and more eager when it comes to casual sex, they still have preferences.

Men only become very picky when they decide to invest in a woman long-term. From the point of view of evolution, it’s the same as being pregnant and taking care of that baby for years, so whoever created that baby with you better have good genes. She also better have loyalty, so you don’t end up raising another man’s kid. However, this does not mean a man’s boner test becomes more difficult to pass the moment he decides it’s time for a LTR. He will pick the best (kindest, most loyal, hottest, intelligent) woman he can get, but his nature is not getting more shallow than it was before.

Short version:

Women can only have a limited number of kids -> they are picky with sexual partners -> want men who have good genes (looks/symmetry), resources and/or social influence.

Men can potentially reproduce 1000s of times -> not picky with sexual partners -> want women in general, but preferably those with good genes.

So who is more shallow?

Men’s preferences are directed at age and visual markers of good genes. This appears to be pretty fixed. A woman can’t gain resources or get more influential and become hotter to men. However, men’s cutoff point for attractive looks (lowest threshold for the “boner test”) is lower than women’s. That just affirms the idea I already thought was true – “impossible beauty standards” don’t exist on a large scale – they are the domain of Hollywood, jobs where you must look a certain way and the most popular men.

Women’s preferences, on the other hand, are directed at good genes AND resources AND influence. In a way, women want so much more than men. Ideally, they want what female bloggers call a “mixture of alpha and beta” – he’s confident, symmetrical and smells right, but is also sweet and loves and has sex with only her. However, they often have to give up one of those things, and still end up being fairly happy. So it’s hard to say what this is. Are women shallower because they want so much more? Are they shallower because they are the picky sex, designed to only pick the best? Or are they less shallow, because they can pick within a much broader collection of criteria, and give up good looks if they can have something else instead?

One thing’s for sure – we’re all a bunch of shallow jerks. And at the same time, this information inspires optimism in me. While we all care about looks at least somewhat, men don’t have high Hollywood standards (unless they are swarmed with hot young women), and women can give up looks if a man offers her resources or his status. Women can use men’s lower physical standards and girl game to get love, and men can use game/status/skills to get love.

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Beauty, Men, Science&studies, Women and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to More on the Shallowness of Men, or Which Gender is More Shallow: Men or Women?

  1. Eric says:

    “Women’s preferences are directed at good genes and good resources, and influence. In a way, women want so much more than a man.”

    I don’t know as I would agree with that. From what I’ve observed, women’s preferences are directed exactly at the OPPOSITE type of man, unless the cultural norms hold good men in enough esteem and influence that female sexual defined by those norms alone. Otherwise, their tendency is to pursue the least suitable males and abandon all their protectiveness for children as well.

    • emmatheemo says:

      Are you in USA? It seems what you’re describing isn’t familiar to me at all, but I heard it could be a thing in USA. What I’m open to (and exploring) is that women have many choices in what to look for in a man (like my post says), and they might pick one thing or another, depending on the environment.

      For example, in a rough environment, choosing the roughest man (even if he’s a bit violent from time to time) might be the best option, evolutionarily speaking. But I’m just speculating at this point.

      • Eric says:

        Emma:
        Yes, I live in the US. I have met a few European women and they generally are quite different from the women here, at least in the choices they make. I’ve travelled in Latin America before as well. I’ve heard more than one Latina remark that American women remind them more of homosexual men than of women!

  2. ScareCrow says:

    I agree with Eric. I think a poison has been introduced to modern women. They do not look for good genes – they look for men who are not part of the crazy conspiracy known as “patriarchy” – hence, they pick losers.

    And make no mistake – women get the choices in this realm.

  3. Pingback: How to Tone Down Your Hypergamy, part 2 | Emma the Emo's Emo Musings

  4. Pingback: Shamed yet Celebrated vs Celebrated yet Shamed | Emma the Emo's Emo Musings

  5. Pingback: When men look at women, it’s sleaze. When women look at men, it’s just plain good fun. An American Apparel case study in hypocrisy. | judgybitch

  6. nate says:

    I disagree, women don’t arbitrarily pick losers intentionally. Women normally choose guys based upon some type of security. Guys make just as bad of decisions too. Rather choosing the slightly plump woman who has a hundred good qualities, they choose to go for the barbie doll who can’t tie her shoes.

  7. I adore this unique blog. It iis like a secret haven where I always learn something
    that fascinates and enchants me.

  8. Alex says:

    “protect them from rape by men with unworthy genes”

    this is just so discriminating and disgusting. You are simply preaching hate towards ugly men. Shame on you !

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s