Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
If that's the way ecological boundaries worked the last 5 millions years and longer

Did they? That's a huge assumption. Where's your evidence?

You seem to be asserting (please correct me if I'm wrong) that a decision, conscious or not, to abstain from having children, made by high-achieving Chinese women, should be interpreted as a reaction to resource constraints?...

If that were to be the case, you must surely agree, it would be a severely dysfunctional reaction. These are women who have more than adequate resources to bring up children : vastly more than their lower-status cohorts who procreate (they could hire staff to look after them without sacrificing their careers).

Your hypothesis seems to be that the trigger condition is the lack of potential mates with higher status than themselves, and that this is somehow a "natural" thing, because in "natural" conditions, women are only attracted to men with higher status than themselves.

Please correct me if I am misrepresenting your views. I'm finding it difficult to actually engage a discussion with you, because you seem to hold a bunch of views which I find "surprising" and which you are not making much effort to explain or back up with evidence.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Tue Jun 17th, 2014 at 10:55:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The negative mode of female selection and their strong reluctance to settle is convincing to me, based on information and experience I got. I even googled up a recent study.

The interpretation of implications is a pure speculation. I guess that any women would be fully capable to go against the hypothesized nature tricks. That would be a deliberate sacrifice of some emotional potential, I reckon. Absent that kind of awareness, the "ecological" mechanism would be:

Tighter Resources -> Fewer Males With Adequate Resources -> Fewer Families (as females do not lower their standards)

The second step correlates with fewer males having adequate self-esteem, other psychological alpha markers. Above this, Behaviour Of Elites might tighten the resource grip even further. There are studies showing that tighter resources lead to higher inequality, as the elites continue to get their usual goods (and even more) at the expense of the bottom. This dynamics puts growing pressure to the closest competition of the elites - and that easier competition is an additional bonus for the elites. The severely dysfunctional reaction you formulate falls under interests of the elites. If, additionally, the elites are aware of the hierarchal (and even ecological) dynamics while everyone else is loosing their head to stay afloat, the elites have pretty much absolute power.

Your hypothesis seems to be that the trigger condition is the lack of potential mates with higher status than themselves, and that this is somehow a "natural" thing...

In the mating setting, "higher status" is not a one-dimensional thing. I just say, "higher" in at least one relevant aspect is necessary for genuine attraction.

by das monde on Tue Jun 17th, 2014 at 11:49:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"higher" in at least one relevant aspect is necessary for genuine attraction.

On examination, your "alpha" thing gets so watered down that it's hard to find any meaning left in it. Yeah, so sexual attraction requires that you find something to admire in the partner. I can relate to that. It doesn't tell me anything.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Wed Jun 18th, 2014 at 11:33:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I could accentuate a practical impact, or excuse my politeness. But I leave it at that.
by das monde on Wed Jun 18th, 2014 at 11:44:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Impeachment gets real

by ARGeezer - Jan 17
20 comments

A Final Warning

by Oui - Jan 10
112 comments

Environment Anarchists

by Oui - Jan 13
4 comments

More Spanish repression

by IdiotSavant - Jan 6
8 comments

Occasional Series