Well
Let's see what people have to say about what they want and don't want of their partners.
I actually read the article itself.
Here are the highlights:
The article starts with stating what we already know:
Here, here and here.
Picking the right trait is not the only thing:
Ok.
If some one tells you that there is no "socio-sexual market", have him read the following:
And I believe everyone here will agree to the following:
The paper took 6 studies and analyzed them.
It started with the definition of deal-breakers from 1983 and validate it.
The next one is more interesting, as it found that are less pickier about short term, but almost as pickier as women in long term. The other important finding is that people with higher sociosexual value are slightly more pickier when it comes to long-term and less pickier about short term.
My interpretation - Alpha males care less about hookups than lower value males. Surprising, but can be explained as Alpha male puts less "value" on hookups (If it happens to a beta male he would feel it means "more").
The third study found that as a woman age she has more deal-breakers. Men have some flat u-shape curve.
My interpretation - Female hamster gets heavier with age.
The fourth study looked at context - pictures were shown online to men and women of attractive person and they were asked would they date that person. Then they were told something disturbing about that person, and they were asked again about dating.
The fifth looked at what deal-makers and deal-breakers were more agreed upon. They found a very (Not) surprising finding:
The sixth was very interesting to me:
The finding showed that both men and women have "low tolerance" to deal-breakers:
Don't thing you can generalize so fast. This study has limitations:
Also, the general finding is one we know of:
If you don't fuck up - you can get the bang or the relationship (if you so desire).
Deal-breaker are more important than Deal-makers
Let's see what people have to say about what they want and don't want of their partners.
I actually read the article itself.
Here are the highlights:
The article starts with stating what we already know:
Quote:Quote:Where have we heard that one before?
Men may desire physical attractiveness in women
because it is an honest cue to health and fertility; and women
may desire social status in men because it signals their ability
to provide resources critical for offspring survival...
For example,
ovulating women may sometimes prefer men higher in subclinical
psychopathy and narcissism
Here, here and here.
Picking the right trait is not the only thing:
Quote:Quote:
However, there may be more to mate preferences than avoiding the low end of desirable traits—people may also have evolved to specifically avoid negative traits. Furthermore,
although positive traits—dealmakers—reflect characteristic
that may improve reproductive fitness, the presence of negative
traits—deal-breakers—may represent even greater reproductive
fitness costs.
Ok.
If some one tells you that there is no "socio-sexual market", have him read the following:
Quote:Quote:So - hot babes and alpha males "can afford to be choosier".
people transact in mating markets by offering their own mate value while seeking to acquire mate value from potential partners. This model specifies that people who have more desirable characteristics have greater mate value, and thus control more demand in mating markets. Such people can afford to be choosier
regarding both positive and negative mate information
And I believe everyone here will agree to the following:
Quote:Quote:That is why men, having less options, will not marry, or just go their own way (MGTOW) because why bother?
Thus, we expect mate value to be adaptively calibrated such
that people with lower (vs. higher) mate value will perceive
fewer—or have a higher tolerance for—relationship deal-breakers
The paper took 6 studies and analyzed them.
It started with the definition of deal-breakers from 1983 and validate it.
The next one is more interesting, as it found that are less pickier about short term, but almost as pickier as women in long term. The other important finding is that people with higher sociosexual value are slightly more pickier when it comes to long-term and less pickier about short term.
My interpretation - Alpha males care less about hookups than lower value males. Surprising, but can be explained as Alpha male puts less "value" on hookups (If it happens to a beta male he would feel it means "more").
The third study found that as a woman age she has more deal-breakers. Men have some flat u-shape curve.
My interpretation - Female hamster gets heavier with age.
The fourth study looked at context - pictures were shown online to men and women of attractive person and they were asked would they date that person. Then they were told something disturbing about that person, and they were asked again about dating.
Quote:Quote:
Men and women differed less
than one might expect from a positive relationship partner
preference model, suggesting that both sexes have similar
needs to avoid bad choices in relationship formation
The fifth looked at what deal-makers and deal-breakers were more agreed upon. They found a very (Not) surprising finding:
Quote:Quote:
people with low short-term mate value have stronger dealmakers than dealbreakers in the short term
context. It may be that those with low value on the short term
mating market focus their efforts in the long-term mating
domain making them more discriminating in this context. That
is, they are more concerned with finding a long-term mate, and
thus have stronger preferences in that context.
The sixth was very interesting to me:
Quote:Quote:The study found that:
We expect that people
should weigh dealbreakers more than dealmakers when evaluating
potential relationship partners (friends, sexual and romantic
partners). In Study 6, we experimentally varied the number
of dealbreakers and dealmakers participants saw in a target,
and assessed their interest in the target
Quote:Quote:Just like in the job market. When searching for a new job, you should be working. Then you can screen better.
We hold that people in committed relationships
can afford to be more discriminating because they already have
a partner; those who are not can be less discriminating
The finding showed that both men and women have "low tolerance" to deal-breakers:
Quote:Quote:
Unlike
many mate preferences, which tend to show sex differences,
the traits associated with avoiding low-quality mates appear
to be relatively similar between the sexes. Nevertheless,
women may pay an even higher premium than men do for
errors in mate choice because of biological differences in
minimal reproductive costs (Trivers, 1972). Women often
reported more dealbreakers than men—an effect that was
relatively stable across ages and stronger in long-term mating
contexts.
Don't thing you can generalize so fast. This study has limitations:
Quote:Quote:
Because all studies relied on self-reports, acquiescence bias and socially desirable responding are important concerns
Also, the general finding is one we know of:
Quote:Quote:My interpretation - Just don't fuck up on dates. Females amplify every fuck-up and will disqualify you as a mate.
In summary, we showed that information about negative
traits was adaptively differentiated by context, sex, and other
individual differences such as sociosexuality and mate value.
Supporting both prospect (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979) and
error management (Haselton & Buss, 2000) theories, the
average dealbreaker damaged a potential mate’s evaluation
more than the average dealmaker helped it. This evidence
suggests that natural selection has punished mating mistakes
more harshly (i.e., death, disease, infertility) than it has
rewarded quality mating choices (i.e., living incrementally
longer, having incrementally healthier offspring).
If you don't fuck up - you can get the bang or the relationship (if you so desire).
Deal-breaker are more important than Deal-makers
"I love a fulfilling and sexual relationship. That is why I make the effort to have many of those" - TheMaleBrain
"Now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb." - Spaceballs
"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine" - Obi-Wan Kenobi
