RNDP 20: Closer to a Unified Theory - Prestige

Dating scholars continue to expand our knowledge of the dynamics involved in two humans hooking up. This week, Jeffrey K. Snyder, Lee A. Kirkpatrick, and H. Clark Barrett learned that young women at two universities expressed preferences for men described as prestigious over men described as acting in a dominating way off a sports field.

Women prefer prestige over dominance in mates

Dominance preferred only among male-male competitions

Los Angeles, CA – December 17, 2008 – A new study in the journal Personal Relationships reveals that women prefer mates who are recognized by their peers for their skills, abilities, and achievements, while not preferring men who use coercive tactics to subordinate their rivals. Indeed, women found dominance strategies of the latter type to be attractive primarily when men used them in the context of male-male athletic competitions.

Jeffrey K. Snyder, Lee A. Kirkpatrick, and H. Clark Barrett conducted three studies with college women at two U.S. universities. Participants evaluated hypothetical potential mates described in written vignettes. The studies were designed to examine the respective effects of men's dominance and prestige on women's assessments of men.

Women are sensitive to the context in which men display domineering behaviors when they evaluate men as potential mates. For example, the traits and behaviors that women found attractive in athletic competitions were unattractive to women when men displayed the same traits and behaviors in interpersonal contexts. Notably, when considering prospective partners for long-term relationships, women's preferences for dominance decrease, and their preferences for prestige increase.

"These findings directly contradict the dating advice of some pop psychologists who advise men to be aggressive in their social interactions. Women most likely avoid dominant men as long-term romantic partners because a dominant man may also be domineering in the household." the authors conclude. [EurekAlert]

I expect Snyder, Kirkpatrick and Barrett have requested further funding to find out who the women actually go out with. Unless they plan to first investigate whether women express a preference for prestigious men over funny guys.

The Joyous Season

It's around this time of year that one begins to reflect on what's important about the season.

Especially since the economy's gone fer shit, and overblown excesses of recent Christmases past are unlikely to fill one's heart to overflowing with synthetic joy.

We coyotes, of course, have always eschewed the season's cheesier aspects. Not for us the fake trees, questionable mall muzak, greed or expensive electronic gimcrackery. It was never really likely, but now the tenor of the times makes it even more improbable that we'd need to agonize about how to cram 80-inch HDTV screens into our 75-inch wide burrows, on the principle that it would be insensitive to return such a caring gift on Boxing Day... I digress. Habitually.

So we coyotes wish to state that what we do wholeheartedly stand for are the important things that should fill one's life all year round. Doing interesting things that don't involve a lot of money. Tolerance, respect and acceptance for one's fellow creatures. And dwarfs. Connecting with family and friends. Phone calls, cards and letters to the important ones that aren't near. Because Facebook and Twitter so do not count. Or regularly sharing meals and hoisting hot or cold beverages and yakking late into the night with the ones that are. Laughing. Engaging. Living.

Now, excuse me. It's time to set the self timer on the ol' camera and snap my annual Christmas card portrait. And given the grim tenor of the times, it's important to get it exactly right...

A vexing vortex

This test, passed to me by The Sage Scribe, is very brief with only one question. But it's a very important one, especially considering the news of the past month. By giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally.

The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which you will have to make a decision. Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please read slowly and give due consideration to each line.

THE SITUATION:

You are in Ottawa. There is chaos all around you caused by a huge mid-December storm with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are a photo-journalist working for a major Canadian newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos.

There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing into the water of the Ottawa River. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.

THE TEST:

Suddenly, you see four men in the water. They are fighting for their lives, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer ... Somehow, the men look familiar ...

You suddenly realize who they are ... It's Stephen Harper, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton, and Gilles Duceppe!

You notice that the raging waters are about to take them under forever. You have two options: You can save lives or you can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize-winning photo, documenting the death of the country's most powerful men at possibly one of Canada's most important historical moments!

THE QUESTION:

Here's the question, and please give an honest answer ...

Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white?

Tank Top Tuesday Poll

A couple of weeks ago, Skylark suggested that I conduct a poll between oatmeal and tank tops. Being that I am a great fan of his blog, I will oblige him...

Oatmeal

Tank Top

Do you prefer oatmeal or tank tops?
	Oatmeal
	Tank tops
Free polls from Pollhost.com

RNDP 19: Dating Schema and Spectacular Efforts

In my quest for the RNDP, I not only googled the search phrase "dating paradigm", I also googled "dating schema".

If you are unfamiliar with the academic term "schema", you are in luck because the first hit for "dating schema" is an article titled "Schema Theory (drawn from D’Andrade 1995)" that expains the term and includes an excerpt on dating to help explain it.

Dorothy Holland and Debra Skinner (1987) studied the US undergraduate dating schema. They describe the "taken-for-granted world of male/female relations" from the perspective of a female undergraduate as follows:

"… a male earns the admiration and affection of a female by treating her well. Intimacy is a result of this process. The female allows herself to become emotionally closer, perhaps as a friend, perhaps as a lover, perhaps as a fiancee, to those attractive males who make a sufficient effort to win her affection. Besides closeness and intimacy, the process of forming a relationship also has to do with prestige. When a male is attracted to a female and tries to earn her affection by good treatment, her attractiveness is validated and she gains prestige in her social group. For his part, the male gains prestige among his peers when he receives admiration and affection from and gains intimacy with females.

Normally, prestigious males are attracted to and establish close relations with prestigious females, and vice versa. Sometimes, however, a male can succeed in winning the affection of a female whose prestige is higher than his own. However, the more attractive she is, the more he must compensate for his lack of prestige by spectacular efforts to treat her well. Correspondingly, females sometimes do form close relationships with males who have higher prestige than they do. When the male is more attractive or has higher prestige than the female, she often must compensate by giving her affection to him without his doing anything to earn it." (1987:101-102)

Within this simplified and idealized world, one set of problematic males is termed jerks, nerds, turkeys, and asses. These are men who are undesirable and don’t know it. They are unattractive (physically or otherwise) and don’t or can’t make up for it with higher cost gifts and other exchange items. Furthermore, they are too dumb to "take a hint," and therefore have to be rejected in such direct ways that the women have to be repeatedly unpleasant, which is stressful for the women. To understand what one of these college women means when she calls a man a jerk we need to understand the (women’s) dating schema.