Thursday, June 7, 2007

6/6/2007 Love At First Sight: Finally Some Answers Continued

6/6/2007 Love At First Sight: Finally Some Answers Continued



Evolutionary Psychology suggests that our attraction to our mates is based on ingrained instincts that best assure us of the continuation of our genes. We are not always conscious of these instincts, and they normally come out as simply who we are or aren't attracted to.



Reproductive Advantage



Here David M. Buss states the two paths to reproductive advantage:

{a} success at intersexual competition (like getting rich) and {b} success at intrasexual attraction”

That reminds me of a guy I knew when I was a kid. This kid was younger than me. But when he was twelve, it was obvious that he had “it”. Everywhere we would go, girls would point and giggle. Even some of the women would stare. He wasn't that good looking, but, well, he had “it”. That's {b}.

there's nothing about me that attracts women. I am not funny, I am not good looking, I am not the least bit confident, I am not rich. I do not even aspire to any of these things. When women try to filter people out, they filter me. But enough self-pity. Back to love at first sight.

If women intuitively decide whether or not to mate with you in the first minutes of meeting you, it's not too hard to figure out why. You may not be able to know someone that soon, but you can sure determine whether or not the man has {a} or {b}. Thus are the minimal standards for women. According to David M. Buss, women will logically be more discriminating because they have to invest more in the reproductive process. Thus women's standards tend to be very high. Like ten feet over my head. And my standards are low. Like falling in love with every cutie behind the cash register.

But how about me? How did I discriminate against others and in favor of Jen or Sarah or Christine?



Smart Wives

Buss states that one of the problems men face in finding a mate is determining which women is fertile. In explaining this, he makes a distinction between a woman being “fertile” and a women having high “Reproductive Value”. Reproductive value refers to the chances that a women will contribute children to future generations, were fertility is the chances of a healthy offspring in the present.

To illustrate this he takes as an example a 14 year old girl and a 24 year old women. He tells us that a 14 year old has a higher reproductive value because she has more childbearing years left where the 24 year old is more fertile. Ugly, huh? A 14 year old? I know, women hate this talk. After all, older women are screwed, right? It reminds women of a future they don't want. They can avoid this future by finding a soul-mate. That's why we're always looking for them, right?

Buss goes on to say that men who are seeking long-term relationships would naturally seek to mate with a female with long term reproductive value. Hmmmnnn...are men all looking for a fourteen year old girl? I wish I could say that this wasn't true of me, but it is. Actually, I don't wish anything anymore.

It all reminds me of Elizabeth Smart, the 13 year old girl who was abducted and subsequently discovered to be one of the wives of an older polygamist. The press said she had been brainwashed.

Why would society frown so on this kind of relationship if it's just nature taking it's course? A good question, and is the idea of soul-mates behind it? What if your soul mate is a 14 year old girl?

Do all men secretly want to marry 14 year old girls? Is it really that bad? Is that why older women are screwed?

I must admit, if I go to a mall or something and decide which female I see that I would want to marry, but decide to drop all social ideas of right and wrong, you can bet that nine of the top 10 females would be in the 13-16 year old range. Yes, I am attracted to young girls. No, I would never try to have sex with one. I see this society as a fight for supremacy to gain as much pleasure for yourself as possible. Losing the battle for “who is right” is of paramount concern in this fight, and I will not lose that battle. But I will tell the truth, as I have here, to join the fight to change social mores.

I can also tell you that the first time I saw a girl and said to myself, “That's the most beautiful girl I have ever seen.” I was 15 years old and so was she. Some 20 odd years later, I think that to myself all the time. But the age of the girl that inspires the thought has not changed.

All the women I have “loved” have been young. 17, 24, 24. Since I was in my mid-twenties, I have not loved a women my age. And it gives me considerable stress to see the women my age and think that I no longer have any choice but to be with them.



A Child Myself



But that doesn't explain all of love at first sight, I was selective within the field of younger women. If my soul-mate was an older women, would I run the other way? Even as alone as I am? Yes, I think I would.

So it does not follow that soul-mates will necessarily be attracted to one another. Nor does it follow that people who are healthy and of high reproductive value will find themselves to be soul-mates.

So where are we? Trapped in a world of illusion, where we instinctively are attracted to people who are more likely to continue our genes into a future that does not truly exist because linear time does not exist. Man, we are messed up. It's no wonder none of the women on Match.com would respond to me.

(Before I move on from evolutionary psychology, I want to vent about one thing. I used to feel sorry for women because when they get older men did not find them sexy anymore. That is no longer. I am alone in my condo every night. There are no women out there who want to give me a chance because I treat people nice and would make a considerate and supportive or attentive lover. (Actually, that's no longer true, either. But it was true at one time. Thankfully I have outgrown my niceness and replaced it with a sort of nefarious distance in which I find people's games amusing.) In the fairy tale, the girl kisses the frog and he turns into a prince. In reality, women don't kiss frogs. They just cast you aside and then when they get older and become frogs themselves they complain about being alone. I have no sorrow for them anymore, they have isolated me all my life and I do not intend to be the one guy in the room who plays fair. We all want someone we are attracted to, and if that isolates people, so be it. I have no intention of ever being with an older women that I am not attracted to so I can claim the moral high ground. I am alone, and a lot of men out there are as well. Women reject easily and do not apologize for their own attractions, I will never again apologize for mine.)



Wish I Didn't Know Now...



Alrighty then. Where have we gotten? We have examined evolutionary psychology to determine why I am attracted to one over another. That and the issues thing that I went into before pretty well explains why I was attracted to who I was attracted to. So now what?

I have analyzed this do death. The problem with analysis is that it works. I know too much now. I know why I wanted these women. It felt so sublime, it was really mundane. So now what?



God Is A Serial Killer



There is somewhat of a chicken or the egg relationship to all of this. If we were soul-mates, then wouldn't destiny conspire to put these women in a position in which I would be drawn to them? I don't think so. That would mean that unattractive humans don't have soul-mates. Maybe some do and some don't. Does that mean love is just for the sexy? “I learned the truth at 17, that love was meant for beauty queens.”

I think love was just meant for the sexy. And the young. This idea of everyone having equal access to God was invented hundreds of years before christ by the Hebrews, the first monotheists. Let's face it, love isn't for everyone. God doesn't speak to everyone, if he exists at all. It's a romantic notion, but no longer rings true. We can throw out this outdated idea based strictly on intuition. Love is for the sexy. There is no universal justice, God is a serial killer.



Pleasure And Pain



So what is left for the rest of us? Pleasure. After all, that's what we are all after , right? That's why you believe in God, right? Because it gives you pleasure to do so. That's why we love, right? Love is more pleasure than sex. Sometimes, anyway. That's why we decided we believe in soul-mates, right? We want our pleasure to last forever.

There are, after all, two motivations for human behavior. Pleasure, and fear. It goes without saying that we avoid what we are afraid of, and pursue that which gives us pleasure. Even sometimes when we believe it is wrong to do so. That's what is left of us.

So now that we can obliterate the idea of soul-mates, we can examine the idea of love from a clear point of view. Love and the pursuit of pleasure. 'Til next time...

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Elizabeth Smart was 14 when she was abducted not 13. And being kidnapped at knifepoint and raped does NOT make a child someones "wife" regardless of how delusional the kidnapper is. What Brian Mitchell did has nothing to do with "nature taking its course" and everything to do with his being a sex offender and a monster. Rape is not about sex, it's about power and control and instilling fear in the victim. Reproductivity and fertility have nothing to do with an old guy's desire for a girl young enough to be his daughter or granddaughter.