You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

gjm comments on Cultural norms in choice of mate - Less Wrong Discussion

-14 [deleted] 10 July 2012 08:18AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (78)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gjm 10 July 2012 10:52:55AM 5 points [-]

The reason why I think choice of partners isn't very close to zero-sum is precisely that I don't think there is a single scale of desirability; different people have different preferences, and a change in partner assignment can easily make everyone happier or everyone less happy.

Comment author: TraderJoe 10 July 2012 11:08:29AM *  0 points [-]

[comment deleted]

Comment author: maia 10 July 2012 01:41:11PM 3 points [-]

No. The point is that desirability is subjective, and therefore "winning" or "losing" at desirability is a two-place word.

Comment author: RobertLumley 10 July 2012 02:04:16PM 1 point [-]

What about a general shift for males to be more heterosexual than homosexual? Not saying this happens, but your statement obviously can be false. It is possible for all women to win.

Comment author: Desrtopa 10 July 2012 02:56:17PM *  4 points [-]

I'm not sure that would be a net win for all women. Suppose a similar proportion of women are lesbians to the proportion of men who are gay, and if more men were straight instead of gay, lesbians would face increased competition for bisexual partners.

Comment author: RobertLumley 10 July 2012 11:44:49PM 1 point [-]

That is an excellent point. I didn't notice this since we've (for the entire post) operated under pretty restrictive heteronormativity. It wouldn't be a win for all women, but it would be a win for all women that we've been talking about.

Comment author: Manfred 10 July 2012 11:41:55PM 0 points [-]

I'm not totally sure what you mean by "wins" and "loses" here - you seem to mean increasing or decreasing some sort of relative attractiveness (to the average potential mate? To your definition of beauty, which seems universal?), which would then be zero-sum for whatever group it's normalized over.

But just because something is called winning, doesn't mean you can rely on it to describe human behavior - humans have a much more complicated set of motivations than "maximize relative attractiveness."