Is height in men a form of “objectification” by women? Obsidian would like to start the discussion.
The recent controversy involving one Ms. Sandra Fluke and one Mr. Rush Limbaugh, opened yet another round in what seems to be a neverending debate concerning a “sexual double standard”– where men are lionized as sexual heroes for having a prodigious bedpost notch-count, while women who have (or are perceived to have) numerous lovers are scandalized and penalized.
The debate fascinates me; for one, it presumes that there only one such “double standard”; and second, it suggests that men are the ones that subject women to any such “double standards”. But this is personal to me as well, because I live on the other side of the “double standards” debate all the time. And from what I see, there is a “double standard” that adversely impacts the lives of men all the time; it is an objectification of men, if you will, and one that is rarely talked about openly – and that is height.
I focus on this one area because, it is perhaps the closest analog to the idea that a woman, deemed a “slut”, is then penalized; for men, it has been shown repeatedly in study after study, both those conducted under the strictest of academic conditions and the more “looser” internet online dating surveys taken by women, that they (women) would prefer a taller man to a shorter one, all other factors being equal of course. Indeed, it has been shown that, even if the shorter man has solid educational credentials and earning potential, that women would prefer a taller man who was a felon. One reality tv show that seeks to pair up couples meeting “cold” showed as its season-ending climatic episode, a woman deciding to leave the compound where all the putative couples stayed, rather than remain with her “soulmate”, who turned out to be short in stature when she could finally meet him face to face. As one might imagine, he was crushed.
I can most certainly relate to what that man on the tv show was going through, and here is where it is my hope that my personal testimony will humanize and broaden the discussion about sexual double standards – because I am myself, a short(er) man. At five feet eight inches (the tallest I’ve ever been in my entire life), I fall two inches shorter than the American national average for male height (which is 5’10”) – and I can assure anyone reading this, that the dating life has been no crystal stair, to borrow a well-known phrase. I have known firsthand what it is like to be rejected for consideration as a date for the evening, or a prom date in high school and so forth, purely on the basis of my height, or the lack thereof – and by “rejected” I mean, being told, flat out, “you’re too short!” in the most harshest of ways. This hurt. Deeply. Not because I lacked a basic compatibility with those who I sought out as potential mates; or because I wasn’t smart or curious or well read enough; or because I was a slacker and wouldn’t hit a lick if my life depended on it; but simply because of something I had absolutely no control over. I was indeed (negatively) objectified in a way that the Wikipedia entry on the term aptly sums up: “Objectification is an attitude that regards a person as a commodity or as an object for use, with little or no regard for a person’s personality or sentience.” I have known, for years, that it was just as possible for women to objectify men, as it was for the other way around. Yet, this fact is never discussed, no matter what the quarter, no matter what the venue or forum, no matter what the circle.
♦◊♦
When I look towards the tendency of men like Limbaugh to lambaste women like Fluke as “sluts” –and the tendency of women to desire taller men as mates – I also look towards explanations by the discipline known as Evolutionary Psychology. In both instances, so the science goes, these tendencies are the result of human male and female evolutionary adaptations to the ancestral environment on Earth many hundreds of thousands of years ago; so, in the case of the “slut” appellation, it came about as an attempt to control the sexual activity of women to ensure what evolutionary psychologists refer to as “paternity certainty”; and in the case of the women preferring to choose taller to shorter men, this came about as a simple fact that, in matters of the hunt and war, Size Matters. A larger man had a decided advantage over a shorter one in the ancestral environment; and it was in a woman’s interest to go with the larger man to ensure her survival, and that of any offspring she would have with said larger man. Both of these patterns have engrained themselves on our brains over hundreds of thousands of years to give us what we have today in terms of our (mating) behavior.
Contrary to what some of EvoPsych’s critics say however, it is indeed possible for one or even a group of individuals to alter their behavioral patterns, no matter how engrained; for example, as the Harvard cognitive scientist Steven Pinker has so aptly demonstrated in his work “The Better Angels of Our Nature”, we as a species have been able to put a collar on violence (which was far and away more prevalent in the ancestral environment), of all kinds — and that includes sexual violence. It’s been a long and arduous process over many centuries, yes — one filled with fits and starts, without a doubt — but, as Pinker shows, we have made progress.
This should fill the hearts of those who wish to change the hearts and minds of men like Limbaugh on the “slut question” with hope, because, if history is any guide, such views can and will change with time. Indeed, the much publicized “Slut Walks” of last year, to say nothing of the dozens of advertisers of Mr. Limbaugh’s nationally syndicated radio show deciding to distance themselves from Mr. Limbaugh last month, are clear and present proofs that despite our “hardwiring”, we can change for the better.
And that brings me back to the topic at hand–examining one aspect of the other side of the “double standard” debate. If it can be proven that men can change in their attitudes–in this case, their sexual attitudes– towards women–it stands to reason that women themselves, can change their attitudes towards men (and their height) as well.
But in order to do that, we have to be willing to acknowledge that we have these tendencies to begin with; and we have to be willing to talk about them. That means that men cannot do it alone; women have to be along for the ride.
so I get the “point” of the article — comparing double standards and seeing how these affect the way we treat other people. However I’m gonna reiterate 2 points. 1) Evolutionary psychology is a BAD explanation for cultural beauty standards. Like really. Back in the day, women like the Venus of Willendorf were considered the attractive norm — now we prefer women who look like flappers, boyish builds with small all around. True human biology dictates that we hetero men and hetero women find respective man parts and lady parts attractive. But that doesn’t say anything about the details of… Read more »
Overall though, this is one of Obsidian’s better articles. Though I will admit it’s not high praise.
We ask that you keep comments to the topic and not make personal comments about the author. Thanks.
Fair enough.
Hi Zek, Long time, no hear! How are you? Thanks for stopping by and taking the time out. My replies are below: “so I get the “point” of the article — comparing double standards and seeing how these affect the way we treat other people.” O: Kinda; the point of my piece was to point out that in no way do men have the lock or corner or market on sexual or sex-based double standards; women can engage in such things, too. “However I’m gonna reiterate 2 points.” O: OK; proceed! “1) Evolutionary psychology is a BAD explanation for cultural… Read more »
Obsidian, O: Why? You haven’t actually provided any sources or data to support your contentions; all you’ve said is EvoPsych is whacked. Come on Zek, you know me better than that; if you have a beef, you should be able to back said beef up with actual facts and data. You don’t do that here. Shame on you No beef. Just reality. I’ve given you proof before in other venues, but I can do so again, briefly. 1. Evopsych is not testable. That is, the traits it describes are impossible or nearly impossible to test — such as attractiveness or… Read more »
“See, “pretty” and “youthful looking” are not objective.”
What I’ve found interesting is that I’ve actually begun to associate obvious plastic surgery with being old…because in our culture so many older people get plastic surgery. So when Meg Ryan started to show obvious signs of plastic surgery, she put on like a decade to me.
Anyway, that’s neither here nor there when it comes to this article, except that I’m agreeing standards of beauty and youth are culturally informed.
“No beef. Just reality. I’ve given you proof before in other venues, but I can do so again, briefly.” O: No, what you’ve given is your opinions. But I’m willing to be entertained… “1. Evopsych is not testable. That is, the traits it describes are impossible or nearly impossible to test — such as attractiveness or assertiveness, which are culturally defined traits — and thus it’s not much of an empirical science. Unfortunately, Evopsych’s tendency to pursue these traits from a biological standpoint often lead to “Just-so Stories” that rely solely upon internal logic. Noam Chomsky talks about this a… Read more »
Hi Guys,
Just a friendly reminder that we try to keep the comments a bit shorter in length. Perhaps breaking them up into multiple comments could help. Also, we ask that you all keep this discussion focused on the topic, and not venture into making assumptions about each other. Thanks.
No worries Mod,
Obsidian and I know each other from way back on other blogs debating the merits (or lack thereof) of HBD and race realism.
That said, no need to tell me twice. I just wanted to throw my two cents.
Obsidian,
Enjoy the floor!
The “slut-shaming vs. male height” is definitely a weak argument. Slut-shaming is just what the word says, a way of shaming–usually girls & women–about their sexuality. Many times the term is used in contempt or in a vengeful, gossipy manner. For example, guys use this tactic to punish women who show no interest in them or who refuse to sleep with them. Women also use slut-shaming against each other. This shaming goes on pretty regularly in high school & college. On the other hand, height is about the gene pool you happen to be born into. And one’s height is… Read more »
¨And one’s height is not usually targeted as a means to attack in a vicious, debasing way.¨
What planet do you live on?
yawn. . .
Your article almost had a good point… until you tried to equate being rejected for being short as having anything to do with calling women sluts…. (!!!) Not. The. Same. Thing. You’d have done better to stick with objectification double standards — women complain about men only wanting to date women with huge breasts… You could also have spoken about the media pressure to fit conventional standards of “beauty” and right now for that women that means being slim with large breasts. For men, that means being tall and buff. Neither conventional form of beauty is “correct” or “right” and… Read more »
I rarely see women approach men. I’ve seen women desperate and lonely as hell that won’t “lower themselves” to approach a guy. They just dance alone lol
I am 6’6, I don’t have women approaching me so tall isn’t the end-all be-all.
Ditto (bar one instance but she was a little bigger than average).
I think they find me more intimidating but that could be my unconscious body language.
Dude I’m 5’9 and even short chicks won’t give me the time of day if there are tall dudes around. Do you have any idea how much fucking game I have to kick to get some love?
I mean it’s like every single woman wants a 6 foot 6 blonde-haired blue-eyed genius who banks 7 figures and drives a Benz, and you gotta trick em into being interested in you, Joe six-pack.
The double standard isn’t in the fact the women prefer height; it is that women prefer height while bemoaning or denying men’s own preferences. ” If it can be proven that men can change in their attitudes–in this case, their sexual attitudes– towards women–it stands to reason that women themselves, can change their attitudes towards men (and their height) as well.” Who wants anyone to change their biological preferences. Look I am 5-7, and it has never been an issue. Some women date me ‘despite’t this, some don’t care in the first place, some would date be but won’t because… Read more »
If anyone wonders if this preference is real – go to any dating website and check out 100 women’s profiles, which includes their height. And, then note that as a rule, they list their preference as a taller man.
Mike L, in response to the comments saying that every woman would wish her man be a little taller: Dee said it best: “I CHOOSE men who appreciate ME… I’ve dated shorter and taller, slim and non-slim, bookworm and jock…but I refuse ANY man who won’t have me as I am.” I’m sick of people telling me that I do or should have a preference for a specific body type, height, history, etc. I’ve spent most of my sexually active and dating life crushing on, having relationships, and having sex with a very wide variety of people. I can’t put… Read more »
Aya, Great for you. But you are not what this comment is about. How often have you read a piece that complains of the objectification of women by men? Is the inevitable male response of “I don’t objectify, so objectification must not happen!” ever comforting? Is it ever true that if a one particular man doesn’t objectifiy that objectification doesn’t happen in general? The answer to the final question is an obvious “no.” This isn’t about the preferences of any particular woman, any more than complaints about the objectification of women deal with the attitudes of any particular man. Why… Read more »
On the other hand it’s refreshing to see people talk about their likes especially when it doesn’t follow the typical stereotypes. Look at the article on small breasts, plenty of men were shouting it from the top of a hill how much they loved small breasts as opposed to big ones that are stereotypically meant to be the best.
I guess feelings of being tall are all relative. I’m just shy of 6′ and feel quite short. I often joke that I’m the tallest person in the world with a Napoleon complex. My father was 6’6″ and I was a freakishly tall child. Unfortunately, I never had a growth spurt during puberty, and I ended well below what was considered to be my projected height. For me, it is all relative. Yes, I am taller than the average person and most people that I see on the street are shorter than I am; however, I FEEL short because I… Read more »
Interesting perspective, Collin, thank you for sharing. I guess it’s like being a part of a family with a long line of scientists and ending up the creative type. Despite the fact that you’re decent at math, you still feel inadequate. You have too many insecurities for someone who seems like such a great guy. 🙂
I can fairly state that I’m insecure about everything. Even things that are so demonstrably true like my intelligence I feel insecure about, though that has more to do with not having gone to college than not being incredibly intelligent. Great is, apparently, in the eye of the beholder. I have yet to find someone who finds me acceptable much less great, but thank you.
My father got his doctorate at 37. My mother reminds me of that fairly often. My oldest brother got a full ride academic scholarship in high school and college. He got his masters in his 20s. I’m 44 and three classes and an internship away from my masters, but am seriously considering quitting. I’ve been considering quitting for the last two or three quarters. I didn’t think I’d get through the first class going back to school after 12 years, but I’m still there. There were 46 people who enrolled when I did. We’re down to about 30 and I’m… Read more »
Well, I saw a completely different (I think)double standard at work in the Limbaugh-Fluke controversy. Would a male law student, whether married or single, have been taken seriously by ANYONE had he gone before a legislative committee and asserted that he had spent X amount for birth control and that he would like his insurance(or whoever) to pay for it? Or would he have been treated to comments that either a) his sex life wasn’t active enough subsidizing; or b) he should be spending more time studying. Ha ha ha. And I don’t think such a male student would have… Read more »
@AnonymousDog:
Very good point! Hadnt thought about that one…
O.
(Please read all of it before commenting) So what are we trying to say folks?! Men are evolutionarilly excused from calling women sluts while women are terrible for wanting to let “only” tall men between their legs? …….lol! Actually, it does kinda ring as a similar trope doesn’t it? Think about it… Casting women is a negative light because “many” women want a tall man for sex (compared to) casting women in a negative light for having lots of sex with “other men except you”. In a way it seems to boil down to a similar issue: some men are… Read more »
Hi dee,
Thanks for the comments and especially the kind parting shot! Much appreciated.
O.
“Objectification” is a magic word. It means “I’m getting judged on something and I don’t like it.” It never means “I’m judging others and applying unfair standards.” It means whatever the victim-of-the-moment wants it to mean, and as such, is a useless term.
I think the Evo Psych explanation is a noteworthy possibility, but it has some real limitations. If the argument is that women are “naturally” drawn to taller men because bigger men are better protection, better hunters, better providers, etc., in some “biological” sense, then there are some major holes in that theory. Leaving aside the role of cultural difference for the moment, the fact is that selecting for larger men is NOT necessarily best for the long-term survival of a community or the whole species. Larger men also use up more resources, and perhaps lose more heat than more compact… Read more »
Thanks, but this doesn’t answer the question and us largely irrelevant.
The question was, name a society where NEITHER mothers nor fathers care who their offspring are, and then, name one of THOSE where slut shaming is complained about. This reference answers neither request.
Nope, sorry. A preference for thin/fit women has no roots in biology, it’s socio-cultural. It does nothing for your genes, and is not evident across all socio-cultural boundaries, just look at Victorian illustrations or the Venus of Willendorf. Symmetrical faces, gynoid fat (boobs and hips) and a 7.0 waist-to-hip ratio for women, height and square jaws for men indicate health and greater fertility. These preferences are biological, and can be traced across social and cultural boundaries, although I imagine that the ideal height and cup-size vary in relation to the norm. To put it bluntly, personal experiences and preferences are… Read more »
I agree with what you say here, with one caveat about the “Venus” figurines. It’s very hard to tell in isolation whether those female figures truly represent a kind of “beauty” ideal to the people who made them. If the figures were totems to represent female spiritual beings, that does not necessarily mean that they were meant to be the embodiment of feminine beauty. (Not every goddess is the goddess of beauty. Goddesses can be just as “ugly” as gods. They can also be sublimely grotesque, just like other spirits.) Whoever first called them Venus figures may have been jumping… Read more »
Agreed.
Some students I knew went on a missionary trip to South America, I think it was Guatemala. One of the things they said that stuck with me was that many of the people they met thought that it was mice that they were on the heavy side because they were thought of as being healthier. There was so little food that the two other things they told me, which stuck out was that they were eating fish at a diner type place and there was a small boy just waiting inside. When they had finished, he asked them if they… Read more »
“If fat is associated with health and I guess an ability to acquire resources, then why does our culture idolize the thin?”
Because in our culture fat is associated with gluttony/greed, BAD health, lazyness, increased risk of heart disease, diabetes etc, and other negative associations.
That’s true. I was wondering more along the lines of that evo psych stuff.
5’8″ isn’t that short. This is anecdotal, but of my friends, the biggest ex-player (he’s in a committed relationship today) is 5’7″. And another one of my friends is 6’1″ and has never had a girlfriend, and he’s in his mid-40s. I know it’s a bore hearing this, but it mostly boils down to attitude, energy, and a few other things like not being strikingly hideous and being at least marginally employed. You can condemn people for liking what they like, but it won’t get you anywhere. Women will give you all sorts of reasons for turning you down, and… Read more »
Wow, what a big surprise looking at the comments here. The people complaining about the article seem to primarily not want to believe in Evolutionary Psychology simply because it is Evolutionary Psychology. HeatherN is honest about this in one comment. Justin Cascio is more devious, claiming that EP “used to be” Social Darwinism (sorry Justin, you fundamentally misunderstand EP or Social Darwinism if you believe this to be true, though it’s difficult from you comment to determine which you are misunderstanding). This is particularly problematic because opinions on this site are usually based in “sciences” that are not based on… Read more »
We’re talking about height preferences, and therefore whether Obsidian gets a date on Friday night. He’s couching it in terms of Evolutionary Psychology, and I can’t help but notice that the exact same outcomes, for the same reasons, would be deduced by a Social Darwinist. In both cases, they explain that height is a visible and accurate-enough signifier of better survival qualities to justify discrimination on its basis. The rest of your comment, Mike L, is casting broad aspersions on the entire site and which kinds of science we accept and which we don’t. That is outside what is permitted… Read more »
Justin,
Social Darwinism was about consciously ordering society to achieve certain outcomes by guaranteeing some groups success and others failure.
This has NOTHING to do with Evolutionary Psychology.
I’d also point out that your own comment contained a fairly offensive claim that the author was “crying” about something – a claim you attempted to “clarify” when someone else called you out on it.
I would strongly suggest that you examine your own comments before lecturing others about the commenting policy.
The term “social Darwinism” was coined by Hofstadter, though the idea predates his coinage, and used as means to dismiss ideas by Thomas Malthus and others like him. It has nothing to do with EP or evolution theory. Today, it is used as a pejorative by some who really don’t understand evolution, or EP for that matter.
Mike L:
Just wanted to say that your comments have been spot-on; bravo!
O.
Right, he should stick to labeling individual writers “crying, noisy complainers” because THAT fits with the commenting guidelines.
The evolutionary argument fails for me in that I am very short (5″6) but built stockily and muscular, so much so that my skinny friend who is 6″2 will not wrestle me because he is at a significant weight disadvantage and knows he will lose. In fact, almost all of my friends who are just tall, and not particularly broad, will not wrestle me because they know I am stronger. Even the ones who have similar weights to me are wary, because they know that my upper body is stronger. Every male in my family is short, but we have… Read more »
Being 5′ 7″ and a former kick boxer, it’s not just weight and power. Your height gives you a lower center of gravity and better balance.
Hence the winning at wrestling and pass rushing. It’s all about getting low. The lowest man wins.
Yeah, and if we’re talking about some kind of “man the hunter” evolution, it’s sure easier to run through the woods when you don’t have to duck so many branches….
There is another interesting thing about fighting and size. In boxing there is something known as optimal punching range. It’s basically the length of your arm minus the length of your fist. When your opponent is that distance away, you can fully extend your arm and keep your shoulder and elbow in tight to your ribs. When you move closer to your target, your shoulder and elbow fly out and you lose power. You might have heard the term getting inside his hands. A shorter opponent with shorter arms can outslug a larger taller opponent with longer arms if he… Read more »
As a tall girl (5’9″), I have a slight bias for men who are at least my height or taller. It’s really been a tough issue for me because I have a complex from being teased mercilessly about my height in grade school. On the other hand, I have a friend who is my height and she is married to a Little Person (person with dwarfism). So you never know! I’ve often had shorter men ask me out and I always wonder why that is. It seems like they would want to pursue shorter women. Be that as it may,… Read more »
“I’ve often had shorter men ask me out and I always wonder why that is.”
Think of it like this. I’m 5′ 7″ tall. Women wear high heels. Shorter women have shorter legs and seem to wear higher heels to lengthen them. I dated a woman I thought was 5′ 6″ or 5′ 7″ and found out she was 5′ 2″ when she took her shoes off. If I dated only women who looked visibly shorter than I in public, I’d only date women under 5 feet tall. That doesn’t leave many options.
You don’t notice that a woman’s wearing 3 or 4 inch heels? 🙂 Actually, what I’ve wondered is why men who are noticeably shorter than me (say, 5’7″ or shorter) have asked me out. The questions that go through my mind are — wouldn’t they feel weird about having a taller girlfriend? Would things like kissing be awkward (I’ll always have to lean over to kiss them)? What if I want to wear heels? If I wear 3″ heels, I’m 6′ tall. Will they feel strange to be with me in public? Will people look at us and think we… Read more »
I briefly dated a woman who was a couple inches taller than I. It did feel a little weird, but I told her that she was with me and no one would laugh at her. Her concerns brought out the protective instinct in me and made me defiant. Kissing goodnight was a bit awkward, but as long as we were sitting, I could lean her back and or lean over her and kiss her in a downward angle. The one advantage I remember was slow dancing. I don’t like to dance at all, but I will slow dance from time… Read more »
Someday I’ll get the hang of the smiley face :).
“’I’ve often had shorter men ask me out and I always wonder why that is. It seems like they would want to pursue shorter women”
Because you believe it is axiomatic men should be taller and bigger. Any analogy I could think of would be offensive.
But do MEN want to be with a woman who is taller and bigger than them? Wouldn’t that feel emasculating? I’m not defending these attitudes, but they can be very engrained. Personally I don’t feel very sexy if I’m feeling like a giant.
As far as you feeling sexy, I don’t know how to help. The only thing I could say is that the guy you’re with had to have seen something in you. Part of feeling sexy is how the other person treats you. You don’t have to restrict discussing your likes and dislikes to the bedroom. What makes you feel special, a guy holding open a door or a call out of the blue telling you how pretty you are? If you feel special, you’ll feel beautiful, giant or no. Some men may feel emasculated or intimidated when they are in… Read more »
Does anyone else feel that the parallel Obsidian draws is a bit odd? I’d argue that the better comparison for height bias (which I’m very familiar with) is weight bias, or build bias as miss information brings up. I’m not sure why he chose to ignore that analogy in favour of one that’s frankly a bit tortured, but I guess figuring that choice of his out is an exercise for the reader.
Actually, a parallel would be something genetic outside the person’s control, a physical characteristic that can’t be changed without surgery or other extraordinary measures. So, weight wouldn’t fit. Breast size or (as you say) “build” (e.g. large breasts) would be a better example.
All, I have to say is, I’m 5’8″ and as a “tall-ish” woman, I do like tall guys, or guys a little taller than me, BUT…I have dated short guys and in fact my ex-husband was 5’7″. Obsidian, I’d date you. You look cute and you are smart. You think deeply. Good qualities. Yup, I’d date you.
Hi ms id date you,
Thanks so much for the kind thoughts. Deeply and much appreciated!
O.
5′ 8″ is considered short?
Right? I’ve met some exceptionally sexy men who are under 5’9″
Anyone else for Seth Green?
I’ve always wondered how George Clooney made the sexiest man list.
5-8 would require you to make $120,000 more then a 6′ tall man and on average you’ earn 10% less then one. Meaning you’d have to be one successful man so yeah 5-8 is short. Written by a 5-7 man.
I’ve heard that statistic about men making more money per year for every inch of height over 6 feet. I’m over six feet, but I have yet to receive a bonus check for that. Is there a government agency where I apply for the height benefit? Is there an account in my name somewhere I don’t know about? I think I’m being cheated.
Obsidian: Is that really how evolutionary psychology explains women’s height requirements? I ask, because that doesn’t really make sense… I can’t work out how greater height categorically translates into being a better hunter and protector, i.e. greater fitness for survival. There are advantages to a shorter stature. For example, the Voyageurs (French fur-traders who operated in the wilderness to the north and west of Lake Superior) were on the whole shorter than the general population because short people have greater strength and endurance proportional to their size. I’ve heard a different explanation, which sounds much more plausible to me: It’s… Read more »
Right, and evo psych doesn’t explain why some people are actually attracted to different body types.
Randomness in attraction is key to diversifying the gene pool I’d guess. It might help dilute the gene pool to avoid everyone having the same hereditary problems?
So then the evo psych stuff isn’t accurate, otherwise no one would find that range of heights etc attractive…
Evo psych could just mean the majority of people, such as the majority of people are heterosexual, majority may like certain hip-to-waist ratio, majority may like larger breasts vs smaller, majority may like tall vs short. It’s not an exact thing though, it’s not like we’re all the same and like the same stuff.
Evo Psych could theoretically explain the diversity of sexual attraction, but usually the popular versions of it are used simplistically, as if “Nature” prefers one simple, solitary reason for anything. Evolutionary psychology could explain diversity if it saw diversity as a real product of natural selection instead of an illusion. It makes more sense to me to argue that human survival is a product of diversity, not of simple forces. Here’s a theory: Homo sapiens has been so adaptable precisely BECAUSE we are attracted to all sorts of different people. There is no one-size-fits all, and perhaps that’s a natural… Read more »
Julie, To understand the EP theories, you have to think about them the same way we think about the idea of “privilege.” Not every male is actually “privileged.” Some have had very hard lives. However, in the broadest sense, and looking at averages, people who are men tend to experience certain benefits that people who are women do not experience. EP is little different. Sure, not EVERY woman will want a man with characteristic X. However, in the broadest sense, and looking at the averages, there will be an overall tendency towards a preference for characteristic X. As I mentioned… Read more »
I prefer them the way I like them. I’ll be offline away for the next week, but take care.
There was a tv show once that showed cuddle fish mating practices and opened my eyes up to how complicated this can get (wish i could find it). It showed a very large male protecting the female he had mated with from other males/predators. (like squid, cuddle fish can actively reject sperm) A smaller male approached the defensive male, showing female colors and was accepted and proceeded to mate with the female and was accepted as the fertilizer for the females eggs.The female ended up staying with the larger male. Maybe one day we will have computers that can take… Read more »
Being patrilineal has no relevance here. BOTH women and men, in general, throughout history have wanted to know who their children are and, in most cases raise them, forming the basic unit of society: the family.
However, based on biology, only women (until DNA testing) could know for sure if she had sex with many men. When people trace family trees, which I have done, BOTH mothers and fathers are shown, not just fathers.
I agree, the way to test someone’s belief is as follows: if paternity of a child is unimportant, then neither is maternity – so if a mother’s baby is swapped at a hospital and she takes home someone else’s infant, it shouldn’t matter to her.
Well Said Transhuman Well Said. Here is a point to ponder for you along that same lines. Why is that if a man is duped by his wife (mother of child) into believing he is the childs father the legal system will not compensate him for his loss of money BUT if a hospital makes an honest mistake they are on the hook for millions. If paternity doesn’t matter then neither does maternity: Except that society views paternity as the provider and maternity as the nurturer. In basic terms the nurturer costs society nothing but the provider costs a ton… Read more »
The response is always, “that’s too bad, deal with it”. So predictable…
We got it a long time ago. We don’t have real problems, just whiny complaints.
The funny thing is these same individuals will complain about how society and the media cause young girls to have body issues because they create an unrealistic standard of beauty.
My issue with this article isn’t that it’s saying height issues are real…my issue is that it’s comparing height issues with slut shaming. Also, I’m not a fan of the EvoPsych explanations.
Why do you have a problem with that comparison? It seems he is using them more as examples of double standards. I don’t think they are on equal footing either, and I don’t think the author is saying that either. I could be wrong about that though. And I’m a big fan of the real EP, and not so much of the EP some people think it is 🙂
Nothing ever counts unless it can happen to her.