Posted on 12/21/2004 3:59:39 PM PST by beavus
ANN ARBOR, Mich.—Men are more likely to want to marry women who are their assistants at work rather than their colleagues or bosses, a University of Michigan study finds.
The study, published in the current issue of Evolution and Human Behavior, highlights the importance of relational dominance in mate selection and discusses the evolutionary utility of male concerns about mating with dominant females.
"These findings provide empirical support for the widespread belief that powerful women are at a disadvantage in the marriage market because men may prefer to marry less accomplished women," said Stephanie Brown, lead author of the study and a social psychologist at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR).
For the study, supported in part by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health, Brown and co-author Brian Lewis from UCLA tested 120 male and 208 female undergraduates by asking them to rate their attraction and desire to affiliate with a man and a woman they were said to know from work.
"Imagine that you have just taken a job and that Jennifer (or John) is your immediate supervisor (or your peer, or your assistant)," study participants were told as they were shown a photo of a male or a female.
After seeing the photo and hearing the description of the person's role at work in relation to their own, participants were asked to use a 9-point Likert scale (1 is not at all, 9 is very much) to rate the extent to which they would enjoy going to a party with Jennifer or John, exercising with the person, dating the person and marrying the person.
Brown and Lewis found that males, but not females, were most strongly attracted to subordinate partners for high-investment activities such as marriage and dating.
"Our results demonstrate that male preference for subordinate women increases as the investment in the relationship increases," Brown said. "This pattern is consistent with the possibility that there were reproductive advantages for males who preferred to form long-term relationships with relatively subordinate partners.
"Given that female infidelity is a severe reproductive threat to males only when investment is high, a preference for subordinate partners may provide adaptive benefits to males in the context of only long-term, investing relationships---not one-night stands."
According to Brown, who is affiliated with the ISR Evolution and Human Adaptation Program, the current findings are consistent with earlier research showing that expressions of vulnerability enhance female attractiveness. "Our results also provide further explanation for why males might attend to dominance-linked characteristics of women such as relative age or income, and why adult males typically prefer partners who are younger and make less money."
For more information on the ISR Evolution and Human Adaptation Program, visit: http://rcgd.isr.umich.edu/ehap/
AHA! You finally scored! It took a long time, but someone finally said something you could get annoyed at!
Congrats! ;^)
so this study reveals that men do not find women with a higher likelihood of nagging attractive. Gee what a surprise.
What next? Study reveals men prefer attactive women over ugly women...
"How does a high achieving woman create incredible stress?"
Oh, let me count the ways:
1) They expect/demand higher income levels from the male to compete. That means you have to earn more, just to be worthy.
2) Their expectations for how an acceptable man should act have been driven through the roof by everyone from Oprah Winfrey to even Dr. Laura. An acceptable mae should be sensitive but strong, but able to compromise, a good earner with a lot of free time, with a lot of education who only wants 2.1 kids and already owns a house and has his act together, but is a bit of a pirate. No stress here.
3) Feminism has encroached even on relatively normal women. Those equality arguments are neveer ending.
Look, I have an accomplished sister who didn't marry till 50 and has no kids, I work under a bright bombshell VP who has cuckholded both her boss and her husband and has no kids. I went to Stanford and have seen other similar women.
I've been there, done that, with a string of girlfriends(one now a doctor, another a lawyer). Now I'm looking in the Ukraine.
Which is not to say male expectations aren't out of wack or I'm God's gift to women, but after a while you just learn from your mistakes and move on.
“Sons are a heritage from the LORD, children a reward from him.
Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are sons born in one’s youth.
Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them. They will not be put to shame when they contend with their enemies in the gate.” (Psalm 127:3-5)
"women in managerial positions can be really mean b*tches "
Whoo boy are you right. My current female supervisor has a string of resignation letters from people telling her they were tired of being dehumanized (not overworked, mind you, but dehumanized).
No. If you'll carefully read my post instead of jerking the knee of your shapely leg, you'll see that I applied the term 'sick' specifically as an adjective to 'the ideas of feminism'. Not 'strong women'. I said in the second paragraph that I want a women strong enough to turn her back on the feminist'/socialist nonsense and be a Good Woman.
I also do not discern anything amiss with women's willingness to succeed in business.
It's not good for children or other living things.
You've asked enough questions of me. Now my turn:
How does an Ivy League education make a woman a more attractive wife to a successful and dominant male?
Not only are they mean, and they admit it, but, they are always, ALWAYS in temporary, bad relationships.
Will you share that big chip on your shoulder with me, honey, so I can be an equal and caring mate in childcare decisions?
Sounds like you have a consisten encounter with women who do not grasp the conscecpt that being bossy does not make you the boss.
Humor: Man files for divorce, at the final hearing the Woman is still demanding that he admit there is another woman. He finally responds, "Somewhere someplace there has got to be someone else."
Does that mean the 9 years I was married and an upper manager in healthcare (with 30 to 50 lovable but wackaloon employees) was an anomaly?
And does that mean that while many FR men adore Ann Coulter, none would want to marry her?
Not being cranky, jez axin' :)
"so this study reveals that men do not find women with a higher likelihood of nagging attractive. Gee what a surprise. "
"What next? Study reveals men prefer attactive women over ugly women..."
Perhaps followed by:
Men who want children prefer women who want to stay home and have children.
Could also be that I viewed these other schools from the perspective of an Engineering (nerd) student.
And I should have phrased "Hot Chicks" as "inteligent and motivated young women". Many of these are now someones full time mom.
I avoid women who wear jock straps.
Now there's a strong woman who knows what she wants!
You bet: I'd like to shag her and then talk politics and ideas with her over a beer.
No way do I want to put up with the book deadlines, pre-interview stress and high pressure schedule.
Forget it.
lol
A young lady in a secretarial or office position is more likely to have the goal of devotion to a family. A high powered exexcutive usually has very different ambitions.
Men know this.
This is why it take a special woman to devote herself to a family. And a strong, dominate man to do the same.
When the values are twisted (and thus roles) the family breaks down and societies suffer.
Good question.
What do you think has caused the increase of divorce?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.