Mating
- Lafyva
- May 27, 2019
- 9 min read
Updated: Oct 31, 2025
Contesting essentialist theories of patriarchal relations: Evolutionary psychology and the denial of history.
This essay emerges from an ongoing mother-son dialogue about contemporary gender relations and their genesis in the history of patriarchy. In order to reframe patriarchy as a relational construct, rather than a simple group-based oppression, a performative notion of identities grounds the paper. It offers a critique of the body of literature that has developed under the broad heading of “evolutionary psychology,” insisting that gendered relations are not out comes of genetic selection, divine mandate, or historical inevitability. An antidotal, millennia-spanning history of gender is offered as an epistemically and politically preferable explanation for patriarchal relations.
(Buss, 2019-02-22)
Buss, D. M. (2019-02-22). Evolutionary Psychology, 6th Edition. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from vbk://9780429590061
The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from vbk://8TJzbjrcJ5PCDUNe_Oqnb2hk0Xu0fgGXIhaYuV_MfLc
Google AI:
Self-centered people can be preoccupied with their own thoughts and feelings, and may not be very attentive to the needs and perspectives of others. They may also have little consideration for others, and may actively pursue their own goals and desires at the expense of others.
Some research suggests that men and women may react differently to stress when it comes to self-centeredness:
Men
A study published in the journal Psychoneuroendicrinology found that men become more egocentric and less able to respond to social situations during times of stress. The study's authors hypothesized that stressed individuals tend to become more egocentric because taking a self-centered perspective reduces emotional and cognitive load.
Women
In contrast, the study found that women react in the opposite way, becoming more prosocial and able to relate to others during times of stress. Other research in social and behavioral sciences has also concluded that women are more socially-oriented (selfless) and men are more individually-oriented (selfish).
Generative AI is experimental.
(Google AI)
The general conclusion drawn from this work is that women will be more socially-orientated (selfless), and men more individually-orientated (selfish).
Full PDF Free: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12553949_The_evolution_of_sex_differences_in_language_sexuality_and_visual-spatial_skills
Female students in the Humanities on average had a stronger drive to empathize than to systemize in comparison to males in the Humanities. Male students in the Sciences on average had a stronger drive to systemize than to empathize in comparison to females in the Sciences.
Sex-related differences in general intelligence g, brain size, and social status.
The higher male g average and wider distribution transform into an exponentially increased male-female ratio at the high end of the g distribution, and this largely explains male dominance in society.
Among adults,
the male advantage is 0.33d equivalent to 5 IQ points.
The results of our meta-analysis show that if these identifications are correct, males from the age of 15 years onwards have higher average g, fluid intelligence, and general intelligence than females by approximately 5 IQ points.
Sex Differences
Most standard tests of intelligence have been constructed so that there are no overall score differences between females and males.
We propose that these genes are involved in the development of cognitive abilities and thus exert a large X-chromosome effect on general intelligence in humans.
As outlined above, the X chromosome is enriched for genes responsible for the development of general intelligence in humans.
Variability hypothesis
The data illustrated in Figure 16 suggest that, on average, males start having positive net
fiscal impact - their per capita tax revenue exceed the (allocated) expenditure they
receive - in their early twenties. Women, on average, do not pas this ‘break even’ point
until their mid-40s. This is due to a combination of lower workforce participation, higher
health and education spending, higher income support and lower direct and indirect
taxation.}
MASCULINITY The appeal of masculine traits is less clear. An early study using schematic faces indicated that masculinized male faces (thick brows, thin lips, square chins, and small eyes) were preferred to feminized ones(Keating1985),but more recent studies using photographic sex continua generally show a preference for feminized male faces(Penton-Voaketal.2004,Perrettetal.1998,Rhodesetal. 2000; but see Johnston et al. 2001). The meta-analysis confirmed that masculinity is unattractive when these manipulated faces are used (−0.47 ± 0.51, N = 12). Perrett and colleagues (1998) suggest that this preference may reflect the perception of more positive personality traits (less dominant, warmer, more honest and cooperative, and more likely to be a good parent) in less masculine faces.
Sexual Dimorphism Male and female faces diverge at puberty (Farkas 1988). In males, testosterone stimulates the growth of the jaw, cheekbones, brow ridges, center of the face (from brow to bottom of nose), and facial hair. In females, growth of these traits is inhibited by estrogen, which may also increase lip size (see Thornhill & Møller 1997 for a review). Because sexual dimorphism increases at puberty, sexually dimorphic traits signal sexual maturity and reproductive potential (Johnston & Franklin 1993; Symons 1979, 1992, 1995; Thornhill & Gangestad 1996).
Predator eyes are at the front, prey eyes are on the side, and ambush predators have their eyes on the top. As the meme goes, Elmo and the Cookie Monster are ambush predators.
Neurological differences:
Personality measures were obtained from a large US sample (N = 10,261) with the 16PF
Questionnaire. Multigroup latent variable modeling was used to estimate sex differences on individual personality dimensions, which were then aggregated to yield a multivariate effect size (Mahalanobis D). We found a global effect size D = 2.71, corresponding to an overlap of only 10% between the male and female distributions. Even excluding the factor showing the largest univariate ES, the global effect size was D = 1.71 (24% overlap). These are extremely large differences by psychological standards.
Gender Differences in Personality across the Ten Aspects of the Big Five
Men are 15% larger than women.
CMH method predicts the target height by adding 6.5 cm to the mid parental height in boys or subtracting 6.5 cm from the mid parental height in girls.
Men have a cardio-respiratory advantage
According to Sexual Strategies Theory (Buss and Schmitt 1993), men have evolved preferences for cues to youth, health, and genetic quality as these provide signals of a woman’s fertility status (i.e.,odds of conceiving currently) and potential reproductive value (i.e., number of children a woman could have into the future). Consequently, men are expected to desire physical features indicative of a woman’s relatively youthful age (e.g., neotonous face, full lips, clear and glowing skin, clear and wide eyes, small chin, lustrous and long hair, good muscle tone; Sugiyama 2005), to desire physical features indicative of high-fertility estrogen levels (e.g., high femininity in face, voice, finger lengths, and a 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio of body fat distribution), and to desire physical features indicative low genetic mutation load (e.g., facial and bodily symmetry). Additionally, men should preferentially desire attributes that indicate a woman would not be unfaithful in a long-term partnership (deleteriously affecting paternity certainty), has good parenting skills, and would have a compatible personality (Buss and Schmitt 1993).
Although the details vary from one setting to the next, culturally successful men have more to offer women and their children (i.e., they have higher reproductive potential) than do less successful men (Irons, 1979; Low, 2000). These are men who wield social influence and control the resources (e.g., money, land, cattle) that women would prefer to have invested in themselves and their children. When men invest resources in parenting, the mortality rates of their children often drop and these children are better prepared for the rigors of adult life (see Chapter 6, this volume). It is not surprising that women and their kin throughout the world prefer these men as marriage partners. This preference is expressed in social-psychological studies, reading materials, lonely heart ads, and other measures (Lippa,2007, 2009; Oda, 2001; Whyte et al., 2016), and in their actual mate choices (e.g., Borgerhoff Mulder, 1990, 2000; Hopcroft, 2006). In short, most women prefer monogamous marriages to wealthy, socially dominant, and physically attractive men (i.e., healthy men with good genes) and want these men to be devoted to them and their children. For most women, this preference is not achieved and they have to make trade-offs (Conroy-Beam & Buss, 2017). These typically involve trading his physical attractiveness for his cultural success. In some circumstances, women develop multiple relationships and secure social and material resources from each of these men (Scelza & Prall, 2018; Starkweather & Hames, 2012), but the underlying dynamic is the same: Women use men to increase the quantity and quality of resources available to them and their children.
Geary, David C.. Male, Female (pp. 213-214). American Psychological Association. Kindle Edition.
Ecological dominance results in the same pattern, as it is the ability to very efficiently extract biological resources from the ecology and manipulate the ecology in ways that reduce mortality risks and support subsequent population expansions (Hill et al., 2001; Kaplan et al., 2000). However, as the population expands beyond the carrying capacity of the ecology, the inevitable result is a population crash, as was argued by Malthus in 1798. The combination of ecological dominance, population expansions, and the elevated mortality that defines population crashes results in a fundamental shift in selection pressures. Darwin’s and Wallace’s (1858, p. 54) conceptualization of natural selection as a “struggle for existence” becomes in addition a struggle with other human beings for control of the resources that support life and allow one to reproduce (Geary, 1998). Social competition is, of course, endemic across species but becomes an especially potent selection pressure for species that achieve ecological dominance (Alexander, 1989). These species have evolved adaptations that reduce ecological constraints on population expansions, creating cycles of expansions and contractions, although overall population levels may remain relatively constant when averaged across these cycles. During contractions, social competition for diminishing resources necessarily increases in intensity (Malthus, 1798).
Geary, David C.. The Origin of Mind: Evolution of Brain, Cognition, and General Intelligence . Amer Psychological Assn. Kindle Edition.
Standardized IQ tests balance different cognitive areas where males and females tend to perform differently to ensure no significant difference in average overall scores. The tests achieve an equal average IQ of 100 for both sexes by including subtests that measure these varied abilities.
The specific cognitive areas with average differences balanced by IQ tests include:
Verbal abilities
Women tend to show an advantage over men in several verbal domains.
Verbal fluency and speech production: Females generally demonstrate stronger abilities in producing speech and writing.
Reading and verbal learning: Studies show females often outperform males in reading comprehension and verbal memory tasks, such as recalling words and stories.
Perceptual speed: Females tend to exhibit faster processing speed, particularly for tasks involving quick perception and identification of symbols or visual information.
Visuospatial abilities
Men typically show an advantage over women in most visuospatial tasks.
Mental rotation: This is one of the most consistent and significant sex differences, favoring males. It involves the ability to mentally manipulate three-dimensional objects.
Spatial visualization: Males often perform better on tasks that require understanding and manipulating objects in space, such as block design puzzles.
Map reading and navigation: Studies show a male advantage in complex spatial navigation tasks.
Mathematical and quantitative reasoning
Differences in mathematical performance are complex and vary based on the specific skills assessed.
Mathematical problem-solving: Some studies have historically found a male advantage in mathematical problem-solving, particularly at higher achievement levels, while more recent research finds similar performance among children.
Computation vs. reasoning: In the past, girls showed a slight advantage in basic computation during elementary school, while boys had a small edge in problem-solving in high school. These differences have largely narrowed over time.
Memory
Differences in memory performance depend on the type of information being recalled.
Episodic memory: Females generally outperform males on episodic memory tasks, especially those involving verbal material. However, men tend to have an advantage in complex visuospatial episodic memory tasks.
Short-term memory: Female performance is often higher on verbal short-term memory, while males show an advantage on spatial short-term memory tasks.
How IQ tests achieve balance
To ensure that standardized IQ tests do not show an overall difference in general intelligence (often called the 𝑔-factor), test developers use a psychometric strategy. They include a balanced mix of subtests that measure the cognitive strengths of both sexes. For example, a test might contain subtests where females have a slight edge (such as verbal comprehension and processing speed) alongside subtests where males perform better (such as visuospatial reasoning). This equalizes the average overall score for both groups, even though differences exist at the subtest level.
Intelligence and IQ
Intelligence is another abstract construct in assessment. It is usually summarized with a
single score known as IQ, which stands for “intelligence quotient.” It was originally derived
from a quotient that included an individual's test score divided by the score that would be
obtained by an average person of the same age (then multiplied by 100 so average scores at any age are 100). The most commonly used intelligence tests have been designed so that there are no overall sex differences in IQ scores (Brody, 1992). When items are selected for inclusion in standardized intelligence tests, items that show an advantage for either males or females are either discarded during test construction or balanced with items that show an equal advantage for the other sex. Hence, overall, there are no sex differences in IQ scores for the most commonly used tests. Thus, we cannot turn to standardized intelligence tests to determine if there is a “smarter sex.
