[Guest]

What I liked about the "stupid male cheaters" one was that the researcher mentions how men have "evolved" from having to have sex with as many women as possible to being more "advanced" and appreciating their partners, which I do think is true.

Hrm. I'd say it's got more to do with the "evolution" of our laws than it has to do with the "evolution" of males.

I'd agree that it takes a very stupid man to cheat in this day and age.

[stressed]

(Personal info deleted)

[CheatConfession]

So what you are saying is that in conventional terms, more beautiful woman are more likely to cheat because they are able to get more men. Don't you think the same can be said about men?

[stressed]

People cheat over an endless number of reasons, not because of one.

That was just a study.

[rcoreyus]

Its an interesting study - assuming the statistics were valid: social studies are very difficult to do well. For instance, you already pre-select for women who are willing to participate, and you need to be sure that the hormone doesn't just make women more like to ADMIT to cheating. Also need to be sure that production of this hormone isn't a result of more sexual activity.

There is something unnerving to think that chemicals strongly affect how we behave, though of course it is true.

I think it is likely that people perceived as attractive (for whatever reason) are more likely to cheat because they have more opportunities.

[WildChild]

Something that comes to mind then is with all the plastic surgery options there are more women who can achieve this look without having the natural biology for it. This may really be much more learned than primal. A woman who is more attractive will garner more male attention and be aware of that. Centuries of women in the position that the only way they could get more in life was through their association with a male would create a need to change male partners to have a better/more affluent/more pleasant life. I know women who's mothers taught them that getting an affluent male to take care of them, was their top priority, they are in their 50s and still doing it.

The idea that men are wired to "spread their seed" is just that, an idea, a theory. I read a paper recently that current research is leaning in another direction and that they are finding support that biologically men benefit from sticking around and ensuring that their mate and infant are protected and survive. Again, social contitioning may be the bigger factor in the old idea of the round heeled male. People interpret things based on their own belief systems and can make some pretty darned huge mental leaps trying to get something to fit the prevailing, deeply engrained beliefs.

Many interpretations made by earlier anthropologists are being rethought. And the things that seemingly intelligent people have believed are jaw dropping. We have premises and behaviors engrained in human culture, so deeply, that we can't presently distinguish them from innate human behavior. Our beliefs truly do shape our reality.

[rcoreyus]

It makes evolutionary sense that a man should expend effort to ensure that his offspring survive, but the "cost" (ignoring social issues) for men to have sex with other women is so small that it seems an efficient behavior from an evolutionary point of view.

[WildChild]

It makes evolutionary sense that a man should expend effort to ensure that his offspring survive, but the "cost" (ignoring social issues) for men to have sex with other women is so small that it seems an efficient behavior from an evolutionary point of view.

The same might be said of women, seeking the best possible sperm donor.

[rcoreyus]

Its somewhat asymmetric. Assume a man and a woman, both in a long term relationship. Also I'm talking evolutionary success, nothing to do with what is moral or right.

If the man has sex with another woman, it takes say an hour, and reduces his fertility for maybe a day, but otherwise there is no cost. He hasn't lost much if she is not an "ideal" mother for his child.

If a woman has sex with another man and becomes pregnant, that is the only child she can have for about a year, and after that she will probably need to spend a huge amount of effort raising the child, unless she abandons it. Because she has so much invested, the woman needs to be sure that this other man is genetically a "good" father.

None of this says anything about how people "should" behave - but I think there is evolutionary pressure for men to be more casually promiscuous (given the opportunity) than women.

The same might be said of women, seeking the best possible sperm donor.