Chicks Dig Dominance - Now validated by SCIENCE

trias_e · 2013-07-23T15:07:00+00:00

It's a cool study, but keep in mind its big limitations. The sample was from a fraternity and sorority, which limits its generalizability (I'm now declaring this a word). What they call male dominance is just male's assessment of the fighting ability of other males, nothing more. There are almost certainly other unaccounted for variables that better explain what we are seeing here other than their 'dominance'. They just happen to correlate with 'dominance'.

Another big issue is that female rating of attractiveness in a lab setting is not going to be one to one with their choices in a real world setting. The sorority girls were judging attractiveness based on photos. Obviously, this isn't going to exactly represent the men they actually choose: A studly spineless beta wimp isn't better off than the alpha average looker. I think the more likely explanation for the effect we see in the study is that women more often have sex with more dominant/aggressive men because they actually like them in action, not because of male/male contests filtering out individuals (which, note, there were actually none of in this study). This would mean that when men judge fighting ability in other men, this judgement correlates to traits that make men more attractive to women behaviorally, which I think is plausible. In general, unless you are studying actual behavior in real situations, I don't trust your study. Assessments suck.

One cool take away from this study that could be useful, although again it is only looking at female choice when they are looking at photographs, not in the real world: "multiple regression and canonical analysis...indicated selection under female choice for negative covariance between girth and facial and vocal masculinity, suggesting that the brawnier a man is, the more important it is for him to have a feminine voice and face, and vice versa." This makes intuitive sense to me.

RedSunBlue · 2013-07-23T14:53:03+00:00

Yet another reason to hit the gym AND the dojo.

[deleted] · 2013-07-23T15:46:45+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Graizur · 2013-07-23T16:29:58+00:00

Thinking about cinnamontoastcrunch commercials and if you guys will get back to archtecturing societies that value, you know, other animals besides your offspring because lol, no, I know, you're great and chicks love you and science is curing cancer and stuff but really, could you pick up art and alpha male your way into a position that makes life better in a way that isn't your own little wireheadmatrix? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirehead_(science_fiction) http://localroger.com/prime-intellect/

lono12 · 2013-07-23T20:28:58+00:00

He's being disingenuous. While looks might not determine how many people you sleep with, they definitely determine what level of people you sleep with. A dominant 5/10 man might sleep with a lot of girls but they will all be 5's and under. A non-dominant 8/10 might not sleep with a lot of women but he will still be able to get into an LTR with a very pretty 8/10.

If all guys really cared about was sleeping with as many women as possible then game wouldn't even exist. Any guy can walk into a bar, talk to the ugliest girl there, and take her home. But only tall handsome men can walk into a bar, talk to the prettiest girl there, and take her home.

If all it took was dominance and sociosexuality then the biggest slayers would be the sleazy hairy armenian guy you see in every club and the horny desperate black guys who date fatties.

Obviously the're not. So this is bullshit.

Title	Chicks Dig Dominance - Now validated by SCIENCE
Author	mescalineeyes
Upvotes	43
Comments	25
Date	July 23, 2013 11:21 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1ivmba/chicks_dig_dominance_now_validated_by_science/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/chicks-dig-dominance-now-validated-by-science.233723 https://theredarchive.com/post/233723

Comments