|
06-29-2011, 10:25 PM
|
| Aspiring PUA Level up: 50%, 25 Points needed | | | Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0 | |
 Evolutionary biology and peacocking
I was wondering if anyone here had read Richard Dawkins' book 'The Selfish Gene'. It probably has a thing of two of relevance to the PUA community (it is quoted Revelations by Venusian Arts) The following two paragraphs from Dawkins' book I found particularly interesting:
Quote: One feature of our own society that seems decidedly anomalous is the matter of sexual advertisement. As we have seen, it is strongly to be expected on evolutionary grounds that, where the sexes differ, it should be the males that advertise and the females that are drab. Modern western man is undoubtedly exceptional in this respect. It is of course true that some men dress flamboyantly and some women dress drably but, on average, there can be no doubt that in our society the equivalent of the Peacock's tail is exhibited by the female, not by the male. Women paint their faces and glue on false eyelashes. Apart from special cases, like actors, men do not. Women seem to be interested in their own personal appearance and they are encouraged in this by their magazines and journals. Men's magazines are less preoccupied with male sexual attractiveness, and a man who is unusually interested in his own dress and appearance is apt to arouse suspicion, both among men and among women. When a woman is described in conversation, it is quite likely that her sexual attractiveness, or lack of it, will be prominently mentioned. This is true, whether the speaker is a man or a woman. When a man is described, the adjectives used are much more likely to have nothing to do with sex.
Faced with these facts, a biologist would be forced to suspect that he was looking at a society in which females compete for males, rather than vice versa. In the case of birds of paradise, we decided that females are drab because they do not need to compete for males. Males are bright and ostentatious because females are in demand and can afford to be choosy. The reason female birds of paradise are in demand is that eggs are a more scarce resource than sperms. What has happened in modern western man? Has the male really become the sought-after sex, the one that is in demand, the sex that can afford to be choosy? If so, why? | Any thoughts? Thanks.
|
Re: Evolutionary biology and peacocking 
Similar Threads for: Evolutionary biology and peacocking
