I grew up in the United States NE, and spent much of my life living in other cultures. Many of those cultures are significantly different from mainstream US culture. I’ve lived across socioeconomic strata and have a degree in Cultural Anthropology.

When I came across hypergamy there were a few things that did not make sense to me.

  • 20,000 years ago there was no money, just some trade items

  • Intelligence and skills survived the ice ages, things like hight did not. (average hight decreases during extreme, near extinction events).

  • A man did not go out to hunt and bring home shiny things for A woman. Men hunted together and went after a Hurd of wild animals and brought them home, or called forth the tribe.

  • Mating practices aren’t really known, but based on native tribes, women defined rights of passage that were life threatening. In short, he may have bought her, but she set the tests that allowed him to even stay in the tribe.

  • Most leaders of indigenous or native tribes are too old to procreate.

So when I hear that “women are attracted to men of wealth, status and resources” and that it is evolutionary in nature, it does not make sense to me.

Personally, I’ve reconciled these by defining hypergamy as “women are attracted to men they look up to (have critical skills); have self respect and earned respect of others (leadership and social skills); and are able to handle very difficult challenges.”

Do you have your own definition, and if so, what is it?