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.

ChristianKl comments on What information has surprised you most recently? - Less Wrong Discussion

11 Post author: FiftyTwo 09 December 2012 04:43AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (122)
Tags: surprising information calibration

Comments (122)

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

Comment author: wedrifid 18 December 2012 01:19:06PM 1 point [-]

Men have fewer easy opportunities to upgrade partners than women. That's why we can appear to have the moral high ground.

Really? Do they have this ready ability to upgrade because:

  • They are initially less picky, more willing to mate with males well below what they could find if they held out and were more selective? That is, so that there are already more opportunities for upgrades? Or...
  • Female mating value is far more fluid than male mating value. Females can more easily improve those features that attract mates. So, they have more opportunities for upgrades because they have more sexual value now, opening up new opportunities.

I wouldn't have said males stereotypically claim this particular high ground to a greater extent than females do---at least in the overall population---nor would that explanation seem the most plausible reason for why it would be so.

In your previous comment you speculated:

On an overly cynical side note, men adapt this way to more suitable partners too. It's just that we usually don't fall in love with resources and social status, but boobs and pretty faces.

Resources and social status tend to be more easy to 'upgrade' than core physical attributes.

Comment author: hyporational 20 December 2012 08:57:41PM *  0 points [-]

Wow, it didn't feel nearly that sloppy when I wrote it, I swear! Thanks for debugging me. Now for the politically incorrect explanation of my thought process...

I think when constructing the argument my brain actually substituted "women I sexually care about" with "women". How horrible is that... For (hopefully obvious) reasons females who sexually interest males are far fewer that males who sexually interest females. Does this seem acceptable to you? As you stated, it's easier for men to upgrade their attractiveness, and this can be true for men well in their fifties and older.

If you check closely I didn't say that men typically claim the moral high ground more often that women do, just that they can appear to have it for the (ridiculously flawed) reason I originally stated.

I wonder if my thought process highlights some mind killing aspects of this topic, and honestly I'm not sure anymore if the improved argument is much more plausible.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit