RyanHoliday.net - Meditations on strategy and life
  • Home
  • About
  • Newsletter
  • Reading List
  • Blog
  • Best Articles
    • Archive
  • Speaking
  • Books and Courses
  • Contact
Home
About
Newsletter
Reading List
Blog
Best Articles
    Archive
Speaking
Books and Courses
Contact
  • Home
  • About
  • Newsletter
  • Reading List
  • Blog
  • Best Articles
    • Archive
  • Speaking
  • Books and Courses
  • Contact
RyanHoliday.net - Meditations on strategy and life
Blog

Thoughts on Ev Psych

Like all things, homosexuality is both biological and sociologically influenced. And if homosexuality is indeed hereditary, the “gay gene” can still only be passed down by heterosexual copulation. While exclusive homosexuality is rare (most homosexual men actually lose their virginity to a woman earlier than straight men) it seems like society is slowly becoming more accepting.

So, as gay marriage brings the pressures of monogamy and youthful experimentation with homosexuality is considered a little more normal and less of something to hide (or cover with bearded relationships), should we see a decrease in the proliferation of the gene? I would think that the gay gene find it harder and harder to be passed on to another generation. Obviously it would take a long time for such changes to be noticeable, if I wouldn’t be surprised if ultimately the data showed a peak and then a gradual decline–that is of course if the conditions remain stable.

***

And from “Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters“:

“If a woman meets a strange man, she has no basis on which to form an opinion of him. He can be a high-quality man, or he can be a low-quality man; she just doesn’t know. However, if he has a wife, that means that at least one woman, who presumably closely inspected his quality before marrying him, found him good enough to marry. So he couldn’t be that bad after all; at least one woman found him desirable. So being married is one cross-culturally transportable ornamentation or lekking device that signifies men’s superior mate value.”

So it seems like a rather small leap to apply informational cascades to sexual selection. It takes but a small patterned consistency to tip it either negatively or positively in the way of a cascade: yes, no, yes, yes yes yes ad infinitum. But the converse is that they can be thrown off equally easily. I’m not sure if the statistical data bears it out by I would imagine that each subsequent divorce makes a mate less attractive to a potential mate. That is, if you had subjects rate identical hypothetical suitors, each divorce on their record would lead to a substantial decrease in appeal. And this is probably why rejection breeds rejections or the whole “when it rains, it pours” aspect of dating.

November 7, 2007by Ryan Holiday

“If you only read the books that everyone else is reading, you can only think what everyone else is thinking.” - Murakami

© 2018 copyright Ryan Holiday // All rights reserved // Privacy Policy
This site directs people to Amazon and is an Amazon Associate member.