A scientific study that actually does provide evidence concerning female hypergamy

Hi Everyone,

I am getting pretty sick and tired of "Evo-Psych"/"Science" threads that post some article only barely (if at all) related to female hypergamy (or other subjects) and which the OP claims "Completely Disproves" female hypergamy (or other subjects).

It's really fucking irritating. /u/HugMuffin I am looking at you as the latest offender.

So I am going to post a thread that includes a link to an article, a meta-analysis of the field no less, that actually does have relevant information within it that actually honest to god really does pertain to the subject matter it says it pertains to and is not some bullshit attempt to make some study on something else support OP's point.

Full article..

http://web.simmons.edu/~turnerg/MCC/Matechoice2PDF.pdf

Evolution of Human Mate Choice

It's actually a great summary of the field, I'd recommend reading the whole thing to anyone who posts here on any subject... but particularly for anyone who argues for/against evo-psych or RP's view of the dimorphic human mating strategies.

Really, honestly, worth reading the whole thing. At least, should you do so, you'd be able to land punches on our chin and not wafting away in the air yards from our face... But I digress...

Hypergamy.

Some select quotes (if you don't like my selection, go read it yourself and use others)....

In primate species in which long-term relationships develop, females generally prefer dominant males as mates. In comparison to other males, dominant males provide greater protection from conspecifics (i.e., members of the same species) and often provide better access to high-quality foods (Smuts, 1985). Similarly, the social status of men is an important consideration in women’s choices of and preferences for marriage partners (Buss, 1994). Although the markers of social status can vary somewhat from one culture to the next (Irons, 1979, 1983), the basic relation is the same: Culturally successful men are preferred as mating and marriage partners.

[...]

In all cultures so studied, the children of culturally successful men have lower mortality rates than the children of other men (see Geary, 2000). Even in cultures in which mortality rates are low, children of culturally successful men benefit in terms of psychological and physical health and in terms of longevity in adulthood (Adler et al., 1994). These are exactly the conditions that would result in the evolution of women’s preference for socially dominant and culturally successful marriage partners.

[...]

Preferred choices. A woman’s preferred marriage partner and her actual marriage partner are not always the same, due to competition from other women and men’s mate choice preferences. Social psychological studies of explicit preferences for marriage partners are thus an important adjunct to research on actual marriage choices. These preferences appear to more clearly capture the processes associated with evolved social and psychological mechanisms that guide reproductive behaviors (Buss, 1996; Geary, 1998; Kenrick, Sadalla, Groth, & Trost, 1990).

Research conducted throughout the world strongly supports the position that women prefer marriage partners who are culturally successful or have the potential to become culturally successful. The most extensive of these studies included 10,000 people in 37 cultures across six continents and five islands (Buss, 1989). On the mate choice survey, women rated “good financial prospect” higher than did men in all cultures. In 29 samples, the “ambition and industriousness” of a prospective mate were more important for women than for men, presumably because these traits are indicators of his reproductive potential---that is, his ability to eventually achieve cultural success. Hatfield and Sprecher (1995) found the same pattern for college students in the United States, Japan, and Russia. In each culture, women valued a prospective mates’ potential for success, earnings, status, and social position more highly than did men

meta-analysis of research published from 1965 to 1986 revealed the same sex difference (Feingold, 1992). Across studies, 3 out of 4 women rated socioeconomic status as more important in a prospective marriage partner than did the average man. Studies conducted prior to 1965 showed the same pattern (e.g., R. Hill, 1945) as did a more recent survey of a nationally representative sample of unmarried adults in the United States (Sprecher, Sullivan, & Hatfield, 1994). Across age, ethnic status, and socioeconomic status, women preferred husbands who were better educated than they were and who earned more money than they did. Buunk and colleagues found the same pattern for women ranging in age from their 20s to their 60s (Buunk, Dijkstra, Fetchenhauer, & Kenrick, 2002). This preference is highlighted when women make cost-benefit trade-offs between a marriage partner's cultural success and other important traits, such as his physical attractiveness (Li, Bailey, Kenrick, & Linsenmeier, 2002; Waynforth, 2001). When women are forced to make such trade-offs, a prospective marriage partner’s cultural success is rated as a necessity and other characteristics as a luxury.

[...]

With the exception of age and physical attractiveness, women are more selective in their choice of marriage partners than are men (Feingold, 1992; Hatfield & Sprecher, 1995; Hill & Hurtado, 1996; Kenrick et al., 1990). In addition to ambition, industriousness, and social dominance, women tend to rate the emotional stability and the family orientation of prospective marriage partners more highly than do men (e.g., Oda, 2001; Waynforth, 2001).

and (finally) from the Summary and Conclusions part

Although the details of how success is achieved can vary from one setting to the next, culturally successful men have high reproductive potential and high reproductive success (Irons, 1979; Low, 2000). These are men who wield greater social influence than other members of the community and control the resources---money, land, cattle, and so forth---that women would prefer to have invested in themselves and their children. When men invest these material and social resources in parenting, children’s mortality rates decline and their reproductive potential in adulthood is enhanced (Geary, 2000; Geary & Flinn, 2001). Women are thus predicted to prefer these men as monogamous marriage partners. This prediction is supported by social-psychological studies, “lonely heart” ads, and other measures (Buss, 1994; Oda, 2001; Whissell, 1996). In short, most women prefer monogamous marriages to wealthy, socially dominant, and physically attracttive men, and want these men to be devoted to them and their children. For most women, this preference is not achieved. Some women attempt to achieve a compromise of sorts through relationships with several men. The implicit goal appears to be to get the best material investment from one man and the best genetic investment from another.

There is plenty more in there. Including male mating strategies, how strategies differ between long/short term mating, all sorts of stuff that will not come as any sort of surprise to our RP members or anyone that reads my long-ass comments but which BP might be surprised to find in a scientific article (as, ya know, it reads like an RP manual on sexual strategies).

Feel free to discuss anything you want to discuss. But I'm here to talk about evo-psych and female hypergamy in particular.

Final note, and for the record...

NO! .... Women are no more evil for pursuing their natural strategies than men are for pursuing theirs.

This isn't a "hating on women" post... This is a "Can we all discuss a science article that actually pertains to the subject matter at hand" post. Because I'm sick of articles shoe-horned in that don't say what OP thinks they say.

Have at it.