Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
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 ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Top Diaries

Occasional Series