|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 13, 2012 9:16:16 GMT 10
Broadly speaking, the EP prediction was that men are mostly interested in a woman's appearance and women are mostly interested in a man's capacity as a provider. Both the Wodaabe and your avian examples are diametrically different to that prediction. Au contraire. Women do seek traits and characteristics that reflect health and vitality in men as evidence of the genetic strength which signifies the ability to provide. It is common throughout the animal world (and we are part of that) for males to posture and compete. Much like that damned peacock. Across the board females desire males with greater resources or the capability of acquiring those resources. Standards of beauty. The waist-hip ratio is universal. These Wodaabe men do not appear to be competing for mates on the basis of robustness (strength)
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 13, 2012 9:51:35 GMT 10
Threse three studies all assume jealousy to be innate and universal and merely look at its permutations. Compare Peter Salovey, The Psychology of Jealousy and Envy, 1991. ISBN 978-0898625554, who shows jealousy to be culture-specific. Moving on from the topic of jealousy, per se, this title sounds promising, "Universal Sex Differences in the Desire for Sexual Variety: Tests From 52 Nations, 6 Continents, and 13 Islands." However, even in our casual discussion thus far, we have identified exceptions not allowed for in its findings, which begins by stating:
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 13, 2012 16:01:04 GMT 10
Please refer back to the original statements about the Wodaabe and what the various symbols represent.
Let's identify then the supposed exceptions and dig deeper into those cultures. Should we quickly dismiss without serious investigation?
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 13, 2012 19:09:23 GMT 10
Please refer back to the original statements about the Wodaabe and what the various symbols represent. The birds of paradise use different dances. The criteria may be different but they are used to signal the same thing or are used to accomplish the same thing. The Wodaabe males are showing off their strength and appearance to win women. Broadly speaking, the EP prediction was that men are mostly interested in a woman's appearance and women are mostly interested in a man's capacity as a provider. Both the Wodaabe and your avian examples are diametrically different to that prediction."Showing off their strength"? Let's identify then the supposed exceptions and dig deeper into those cultures. Should we quickly dismiss without serious investigation? Certainly you can investigate and challenge any evidence which, at face value, falsifies your theory. The ball is in your court.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 14, 2012 1:00:23 GMT 10
"Long braids and cowrie shells: Symbolise fertility and wealth"
Wealth.
"Red ochre, which coats the face, is associated with blood and violence and so only used on special occasions. Yellow clay, used by some dancers to paint patterns on the face, is the colour of magic and transformation."
Violence, magic? Certainly not weak and effiminate.
Quotes are from the article that you offered.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 14, 2012 7:24:59 GMT 10
Your selectively skewed quote ignores the overall effect. Please note, a symbol of wealth does not equate to real wealth. Moreover, in many other societies women variously employ such mostly empty symbolism. Jewish brides, Yemen "Violence, magic?" Remember, these are just colours. They traditionally adorn all contestants, who are not required to demonstrate these traits but are chosen or not by the female judges, on the basis of their overall looks, expressivity and charisma.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 14, 2012 9:01:47 GMT 10
The quotes are not skewed as they are quotes directly from the article. The colors are just symbols and therefore have no meaning?
I will go ahead and agree. No aspect of human mate selection or any other behavior is based on our evolutionary heritage because one example that we will only examine on the surface and no other explanation is permitted.
My work will continue and has borne fruit.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 14, 2012 9:59:34 GMT 10
The quotes are not skewed as they are quotes directly from the article. The colors are just symbols and therefore have no meaning? The selection was skewed as it was contrary to the thrust of the article (i.e., out of context). Any symbols are empty if they remain only symbols, disregarded in practice. I will go ahead and agree. No aspect of human mate selection or any other behavior is based on our evolutionary heritage because one example that we will only examine on the surface and no other explanation is permitted.
My work will continue and has borne fruit. I suggest, and I suspect most following the various threads will agree, that it is your treatment of the evidence which has thus far been superficial. What fruit has your work borne?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Jan 15, 2012 11:46:45 GMT 10
My treatment of evidence, beyond BBC stories, is far from superficial. It is normal for me to have to deal with criticism beyond "this dude wears lipstick so your entire thesis is bunk."
I have found that those that oppose alternative theories, alternative to the social learning idea at least, are completely unwilling to engage in any discussion of the evidence. It is more useful to post pictures of a BINGO that cases asperions upon those that have engaged themselves in the research. Not very classy Brother and that was far beneath you.
Quoting directly from the article, that you presented was certainly noted skewing the issue.
"I suggest, and I suspect most following the various threads will agree, that it is your treatment of the evidence which has thus far been superficial. What fruit has your work borne?"
Please don't take this as a dodge. My work has borne fruit and not here as I don't consider a friendly discussion on an internet forum to be my work. The results of my work are not available for publication or discussion right now. Perhaps in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 15, 2012 15:46:29 GMT 10
On the one hand: If, on appropriate occasions, the members tell, enjoy, trade, and/or devise transgressively funny jokes about their denomination, it’s a church.
If such jokes reliably meet with stifling social disapproval, it’s a cult.
Anon. On the other hand, whether or not repeated misrepresentations and hyperbole constitute class, I'll leave to others to decide. Returning to the subject of "mate selection strategies." What of those societies in which Arranged marriages are the norm, whether by the parents or mediated by a marriage broker? In some cases the couple do not even meet until their wedding day.
|
|